Thursday, September 14, 2023

But Doo-Doo DeSantis doesn't have 91 charges against him . . .

Starting off with this video. 




LGBTQ+ people have always been part of our societies whether we've chosen to realize it or not.  They have a long history and they are just as important as anyone else.  As I've noted many times before, I have a brother who is gay (and two more who are straight) and this is not a debatable thing with me.  We all deserve rights, we all deserve dignity.  If you're a homophobe or a transphobe, we don't really have much to say to one another.  If you're going through life hating one of my brothers, sorry, I don't have time for you.

Doo-Doo Ron Ron DeSantis has more ethical lapses. Philippe Naughton (THE DAILY BEAST) reports:


It appears Ron DeSantis enjoys the trappings of wealth, despite his much-vaunted blue-collar roots. A Washington Post investigation has unearthed at least six previously undisclosed private jet trips, with lodging and dining thrown in, that DeSantis took in late 2018 between his election and swearing-in as governor of Florida. They reportedly include a trip to the Augusta National Golf Club, on a jet owned by Mori Hosseini, a businessman toward whom DeSantis later reportedly steered $92 million in federal pandemic funding. The Augusta trip was on Dec. 20 and 21, 2018, and saw the governor-elect enjoy a jacket-and-tie dinner and sleep in a cabin built for President Eisenhower before a round on the Masters course next day, none of which was publicly disclosed, according to the Post. A DeSantis campaign spokesman told the newspaper that all the trips and events mentioned were “compliant and received proper payment.”






Though the governor did not disclose the trips, his campaign maintained they were legal and did not violate ethics laws. DeSantis could have paid the equivalent to a coach ticket to reimburse the donors for the flights without violating ethics laws, though it's unclear if this is what he did.

"All travel and events you mention — from almost five years ago — were compliant and received proper payment," Andrew Romeo, a spokesperson for the DeSantis campaign, told the Post.

The head of DeSantis' transition team at the time of the flights, Susie Wells, referred questions to former President Donald Trump's campaign, for which she now works.

"The DeSantis campaign’s ridiculous statement doesn’t even merit a response. Instead of pointing fingers and trying to place blame on others — like they have historically done — the DeSantis’ should take a good, hard look in the mirror to better understand why they chose to act unethically and sell access to their office," Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said in response.






DeSantis’s willingness to accept perks after being elected troubled some of his advisers at the time, who feared that he would run afoul of the state’s ethics laws, according to multiple people familiar with the situation. The Gibson memo was written partially to explain to DeSantis exactly what he could and could not do, according to people with knowledge of the document, who like others interviewed for this story spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation. The memo also warned against taking gifts from those seeking to curry favor with the incoming governor.

“Public officers are prohibited from soliciting or accepting anything of value, such as a gift, loan, reward, promise of future employment, favor or service that is based on an understanding that their vote, official action or judgment would be influenced by such gift,” the memo said. “Public officers and employees are prohibited from corruptly using or attempting to use their official positions or the resources thereof to obtain a special privilege or benefit for themselves or others.”




According to the  DeSantis’s remarks were made in a CBS Evening News interview on Wednesday. The governor questioned whether voters would choose a nominee facing 91 criminal counts.
[. . .]


“I think the chance of getting elected president after being convicted of a felony is as close to zero as you can get,” DeSantis said.

Additionally, DeSantis criticised Trump’s financial record, noting the significant increase in national debt during Trump’s presidency. DeSantis argued that Trump broke a promise by adding almost $8 trillion to the national debt.


Doo-Doo is not currently facing 91 charges so what's his excuse for being so loathed?  Troy Myers (West Palm Beach's WPEC) reports:



In a new poll, former President Donald Trump remains strongly ahead of his GOP opponents and virtually tied with President Joe Biden in a hypothetical 2024 general election.

Biden received 73 percent support among Democratic-leaning voters, and Trump stands with 62 percent support among Republican-leaning voters compared to 57 percent from a month before. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis's support decreased from 18 percent support in August to 12 percent in the most recent Quinnipiac University poll. 


Again, Doo-Doo doesn't have 91 charges against him at present so what's his excuse for polling so far behind Trump?


Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


Thursday, September 14, 2023.  Efforts to ban books increase, the family of a woman with dual citizenship (she's a citizen of Russia and of Israel) wants the US to play "cops of the world," and much more.



Let's start with this from AP:

The United States should use its influence to help win the freedom of a Russian-Israeli academic at Princeton University who went missing in Iraq nearly six months ago and is believed to be held by an Iran-backed militia regarded by Washington as a terrorist group, her sister said Wednesday.

No, we shouldn't.  The woman is most likely a spy and, if not, she's an idiot.  Regardless, she had no business being in Iraq and she's not an American citizen.  She created her own little international incident and if she needs help now, she can turn to Russia or to Israel -- those her countries.  Stop pushing your problems off on others.  Deal with your stupidity -- and it's stupidity either way, actually.  She was stupid to have gone to Iraq as an 'academic' or she was stupid as a spy for being so obvious.

I don't know which and I don't care.  




This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s."  Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London).  The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released.  This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq.  Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners.  So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages.  And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it.  At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject.  Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise.  What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did.  A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama."  Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of.  Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them?  The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."


There was no reason for the US to be involved in that issue.  Five American servicemembers were killed.  Their killers were in custody.  Four mercenaries from the UK and one computer consultant had been kidnapped two years prior.  Going in the chances were strong that every one of them was dead.  Turns out Peter Moore was alive (the computer guy).  (The four contractors were all killed: Jason Swindlehurst, Jason Creswell, Alec Maclachlan and Alan McMenemy.)  

Killers of five US troops in US custody -- one of which was the ringleader of the League of Righteous -- a terrorist organization.  The handover was beyond stupid and had no benefits for the US or for Iraq.  It was a huge mistake which is why so few people talk about today -- we must protect Barack at all costs.  

What he did was outrageous.  Not only was he making a deal with terrorists -- and letting them set the terms -- he was releasing the killers of Americans which was bad for the US.  And bad for Iraq was letting these killers out so that they could terrorize the Iraqi people -- which is what they continue to do.

And on top of everything, Barack looked like an idiot on the world stage and that's when the US media lost interest in the topic.  He gave the terrorists what they wanted: the release of all killers in custody.  And?  They released some.  Some.  Not all five.  A few months later, in August of that year, they were talking big to the press about how they'd do what they wanted and they didn't trust Barack.  Big talk was easy because Barack had released the killers.  Not handed them over to Iraqi courts and jails, mind you, just released them, like turning a turtle back into the wild.

They mocked him, the Arabic press was all over that story.

There was no great win in that.  And those five British citizens should have been the focus of their own government.

The Israeli-Russia woman and her family need to appeal to the countries she's a citizen of.  She's not an American citizen and US interests do not need to be wasted on her in Iraq.

Iraq has enough issues and enough problems that the US government could help with -- such as bringing people to the table to implement the Constitutional article to determine the status of Kirkuk.  When Bully Boy Bush was in the White House, the Iraqi Constitution called for that to be implemented.  Then prime minister and forever thug Nouri al-Maliki refused to do so.  Brookings warned that the failure to implement it presented real risks to Iraq's future.  

We've now seen that even more so.  

That's what our diplomatic mission should be.

And if the governments of Israel and Russia want to use their diplomatic resources to rescue the stupid woman, that's their business.  But she is not a US priority and she is not an Iraqi priority.  

And I'm not seeing any history of that woman or her sister advocating for the release of Julian Assange or any other political prisoner so apparently they only believe in themselves.  Not going to rush to help selfish people.

JEWISH NEWS SYNDICATE notes, "While Tsurkov is not a U.S. citizen, Emma is pressing Washington to use its financial support to Iraq as leverage to secure her sister’s freedom."  The US government is not and should not be the cops of the world.  Your sister has two countries who can help her due to her citizenship: Russia and Israel.  



Elizabeth Tsurkov is not a US citizen, limiting the tools at the American government's disposal and the direct ability of Washington officials to secure her release. But Emma Tsurkov contends that the US government still has substantial influence given that her sister has significant US ties as a “graduate student in an American institution that is approved and funded for research."



No that does not create a legal obligation and instead of fighting windmills, her sister should be using the resources she does have to appeal to the governments of  Russia and Israel.


Let's move over to the topic of books.  At THE NEW YORK TIMES, Naomi Klein writes:


Though doppelgängers reliably elicit feelings of vertigo, I find the sudden prevalence of doubles oddly comforting. For years I struggled privately with a problem I considered rather niche: being perennially confused and conflated with another writer and outspoken political analyst named Naomi, Naomi Wolf, even though I bear only a passing resemblance to her. (And I would see the same thing happening to her.) Once best known for best-selling feminist books like “The Beauty Myth” and for a controversial role advising Al Gore’s presidential run, Ms. Wolf has more recently distinguished herself as an industrial-scale disseminator of vaccine-related medical misinformation, as well as a fixture on pro-Trump shows like the one hosted daily by Steve Bannon.



I sometimes wondered what I had done to deserve my doppelgänger woes. With popular culture feeling increasingly like a house of mirrors with duplicated and simulated and similar selves endlessly refracted, many more of us may soon be dealing with versions of doppelgänger confusion. What role is this proliferation of doubles, twins and clones playing? Doppelgängers, which combine the German words for doppel (double) with gänger (goer), are often regarded as warnings, or omens.

In an attempt to better understand the warnings carried by my doppelgänger experience, I spent many evenings immersing myself in the rich repertory of doppelgänger films. One that proved particularly helpful was Jordan Peele’s “Us.” This 2019 horror film imagines a society much like our own, only sitting on top of a shadowy underworld, inhabited by warped doubles of everyone living aboveground. Every move above is mirrored below in darkness and misery. Until the underground doppelgängers get tired of the arrangement and wreak havoc.

Who are these underground people? one terrified character asks.

“We’re Americans,” comes the gut punch of an answer.

The film has been interpreted as an allegory for capitalism’s entanglements with racial and other forms of oppression, with the comforts of the few requiring the exploitation of a shadow world. That understanding landed particularly hard during the pandemic, when I watched the film. Those of us who were part of the lockdown class were able to shelter in place because we were being served by “essential workers,” many of whom did not have the ability to call in sick. Doubles often play this role, offering viewers and readers uncomfortable ways into their own story. By showing us a character facing her doppelgänger, we are exposed to parts of ourselves we can least bear to see, but at a slight angle, and through a warped mirror.

[. . .]

We are, once again, at a historical juncture where our physical and political worlds are changing too quickly and too consequentially for our minds to easily comprehend. This is why I decided to start regarding my own doppelgänger as a narrow aperture through which to look at forces I consider dangerous, and that can be hard to confront directly.

Rather than worrying about people thinking that she and I were one and the same, I got interested in the ways she seems to have become a doppelgänger of her former self. Because I have been getting confused with Ms. Wolf for close to a decade and half, I knew that she had been dabbling in conspiracy culture for years. (I would periodically get harangued online for positions she had taken.)

Before the pandemic, her underlying values seemed somewhat stable: feminism, sexual freedom, democracy, basic liberalism. Then, rather suddenly, they appeared less so. In a matter of months, I watched her go from questioning masks in schools to questioning election results alongside Mr. Bannon. Next she was engaging in Jan. 6 revisionism, condoning the Supreme Court’s assault on abortion rights, posting about her firearms and also warning that “war is being waged upon us.”

This is a phenomenon far larger than Ms. Wolf, of course. A great many of us have witnessed it in people we know, once respected and even still love. We tell one another that they have disappeared “down the rabbit hole,” lost to conspiratorial fantasies, embracing apocalyptic language, seemingly unreachable by affection or reason.



 
Naomi's book came out this week.  My apologies because I wrongly stated last week that it had come out.  I was reading a few weeks ago and thought it was coming out Tuesday of last week.  I strongly recommend the book and it's entitled DOPPLEGANGER: A TRIP INTO THE MIRROR WORLD.  That's by Naomi Klein -- Klein.


Let's note how far Naomi Wolf has fallen: She's now reTweeting Jordan Peterson.  If you're not getting it, Jordan Peterson is infamous for insisting that women's studies programs should be defunded.

I've said this many times before but I'm saying it again, should crazy get off the drugs and try to return to the left, you're an idiot if you let her.  It's not just that Naomi Wolf is bat s**t crazy, it's that she's done real harm to women and feminists do not need to be masochists.  She chose her side.  There is no return from the dark side for her..  She is not to be trusted.  She's a right winger who wants to vote for Donald Trump.  She hangs out with homophobes and transphobes.  Moms For Bigotry have the Naomi Wolf stamp of approval.  There is no forgiveness, there is no salvation.  She has stabbed feminism in the back and that's where it should stop.  We would be idiots to ever let her back in.  

The right-wing?  They're fools to embrace her.  Ava and I long ago -- back in the '00s -- exposed how she stole the work of Judith N. Shklar for her piece of garbage THE BEAUTY MYTH -- Shklar had given lectures Naomi attended and cribbed for without doing any attribution.  We've noted how, in FIRE WITH FIRE (her second book), she praises the 'beauty' of Victoria Woodhull while immediately then insulting the looks of Madam CJ Walker.  It was racist.  And, point of fact, Walker was cute, Woodhull had to be photographed from certain angles.  Then came PROMISCUITIES where she brunches the morning after with rapists and feels no concern for the woman who was raped the night before.  Hey, it's a frat house, Naomi's down with the bros.  MISCONCEPTIONS?  A book on motherhood which reads, naturally and obviously, like a book by someone who didn't raise children.  (Those kids were so lucky to have their father and step-mother.)  Crazy most recently took her dissertation -- which goes to how lousy Oxford has become -- and turned it into OUTRAGES: SEX, CENSORSHIP, AND THE CRIMINALIZATION OF LOVE.

Want to read it?

You can't.  

It was pulped.  Her central thesis was based on her misunderstanding of historical records.


The publisher pulped all copies.  

But, explain this, Oxford didn't immediately pull her doctorate.  Her research -- that Oxford waived through -- was all wrong. Well, her conclusions from her research.  In the real world, that happens and you get your dissertation pulled and the university involved issues a statement if this was a public matter.  (It was a public matter.  Her turning her dissertation into a book made it a public matter.)  

She's nuts.  She's always been a huge question mark and we should be a closed community to her at this point.  She is not a feminist.  She has used feminism to grift and now she tries to use it to pretend she's not the idiotic reactionary, tin-foil hat wearer that she is.


As insane as she is, I haven't called for her book to be banned or burned.  And never would.  We don't ban books, we don't burn them -- even badly written ones.



But the other Naomi, Klein, has a good book worth reading.






During a Tuesday Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about book bans, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) read sexually explicit passages from two LGBTQ+ memoirs in order to justify censorship as a necessary way to protect children from pornography and sexual grooming.

However, other experts during the hearing pointed out book bans are also being used to ban non-sexual LGBTQ+ children’s books and other books about the anti-Semitic Nazi Holocaust, Native American genocide, and Black and Latino civil rights experiences.

The hearing, entitled “Book Bans: Examining How Censorship Limits Liberty and Literature,” featured testimony from five witnesses: two who claimed that the upset around book bans is over-exaggerated, and three who consider book bans an attack on democratic free-thinking.

[. . .]

However, Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL) called the Republicans’ focus on overly sexual passages “a distraction from the real challenge,” adding, “No one is advocating for sexually explicit content to be available in an elementary school library or in [the] children’s section of the library.”

“I understand and respect that parents may choose to limit what their children read, especially at younger ages. My wife and I did. Others do, too,” Durbin said. “But no parent should have the right to tell another parent’s child what they can and cannot read in school or at home. Every student deserves access to books that reflect their experiences and help them better understand who they are.”

During her testimony, Emily Knox, president of the National Coalition Against Censorship, noted that the American Library Association’s (ALA) Office for Intellectual Freedom counted 2,571 unique titles targeted for in-school censorship in 2022 — a 38% increase from the number of titles targeted in 2021.

“Almost all of the books can be categorized as ‘diverse’ or books by and about ‘LGBTQIA, Native, people of color, gender diversity, people with disabilities and ethnic, cultural, and religious minorities,’” Knox said. “These attacks on our freedom to read, our libraries, and our schools are unconstitutional and unpopular. Seventy-one percent of Americans oppose book bans in public libraries, and 67% oppose book bans in school libraries,” she added, citing a March 2022 ALA survey.

The National Education Association (NEA) noted that recent book bans have targeted such titles as Art Speigelman’s Holocaust graphic novel Maus and numerous titles about the struggle for civil rights by people of color, including Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye, Sharon Creech’s Walk Two Moons, and Duncan Tonatiuh’s Separate is Never Equal.


Sam Seder addresses the hearing in the video below.



 The League of Women Voters hosted a discussion on the topic of book banning this week.



NBC 5 CHICAGO notes:


As bomb threats earlier this week forced nearly half a dozen libraries in Chicago and the suburbs to evacuate, Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias testified at a U.S. Senate Judiciary hearing on the state's first-in-the-nation ban against book bans.

“…What I am concerned with is political attempts to ban books that are driving libraries to close their doors, stifle creativity, make librarians quit their jobs," Giannoulias said during Tuesday's hearing. "And just a few weeks ago, literally have to evacuate due to numerous bomb threats at multiple locations.”

The first-of-its-kind law, signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker on June 12, states that Illinois public libraries that restrict or ban materials because of “partisan or doctrinal” disapproval will be ineligible for state funding as of Jan. 1, 2024, when the new law goes into effect.


Layne Ray (THE POST) provides context:

The American Library Association began observing Banned Books Week in 1982. According to its website, it “celebrates the freedom to read and spotlights current and historical attempts to censor books in libraries and schools.” Teachers, authors, students, librarians and supporters of the First Amendment can all come together this Oct. 1-7 to bring awareness to this harmful form of censorship that affects our nation as a whole. 

Now more than ever, education is being censored. Topics like racism and sexism as well as LGBTQIA+ themes being put to a halt in certain places are disregarding all students’ First Amendment rights. Florida laws like the Stop WOKE Act and the “Don’t Say Gay” bill don’t directly prohibit any titles from being incorporated into the curriculum, but they freely open the opportunity for books to be challenged and removed from school libraries and lesson plans. Evidently, many have done so as Pen America named Florida as having the second-highest number of banned books between July and December of 2022 at 357 books. 

In a similar, but not as severe situation is Ohio. There have been 79 titles challenged in total, but House Bills 322 and 327 that prohibit teachings of “divisive concepts” being passed could increase that number quickly. The bills haven’t been dismissed but have been in the House committee since 2021. With the growing popularity and turmoil of such censorship, Ohio may follow the trend. 

Bookshop.org, a popular online bookstore, has an entry titled, “We Don’t Ban Books Over Here” in which readers can purchase books that are typically challenged or banned in some schools or libraries. It includes works such as “Lord of the Flies,” “The Hate U Give” and “The 1619 Project.” One of the more ironic ones found on this list, which has been read by a large number of students who attended public high schools, is “Fahrenheit 451.” While its significance went over my head as a 15-year-old, it is certainly one of the most crucial books for readers today. Banning a book about banning books is a terrifying level of censorship that is inexcusable. 


Banned Books Week is a week that highlights the undemocratic effort to ban books and celebrates our right to read.  This year, it will be October 1st through 7th.  ALA notes:


“This is a dangerous time for readers and the public servants who provide access to reading materials. Readers, particularly students, are losing access to critical information, and librarians and teachers are under attack for doing their jobs.”
- Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom 

Banned Books Week celebrates the freedom to read and spotlights current and historical attempts to censor books in libraries and schools. For more than 40 years, the annual event has brought together the entire book community — librarians, teachers, booksellers, publishers, writers, journalists, and readers of all types — in shared support of the freedom to seek and to express ideas, even those some consider unorthodox or unpopular. The books featured during Banned Books Week have all been targeted for removal or restriction in libraries and schools. By focusing on efforts across the country to remove or restrict access to books, Banned Books Week draws national attention to the harms of censorship.

In a time of intense political polarization, library staff in every state are facing an unprecedented number of attempts to ban books. ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom ALA documented 1,269 demands to censor library books and resources in 2022, the highest number of attempted book bans since ALA began compiling data about censorship in libraries more than 20 years ago. The unparalleled number of reported book challenges in 2022 nearly doubles the 729 book challenges reported in 2021. Of the record 2,571 unique titles targeted for censorship, most were by or about LGBTQIA+ persons and Black, Indigenous, and people of color.

The theme for Banned Books Week 2023 is "Let Freedom Read." When we ban books, we're closing off readers to people, places, and perspectives. But when we stand up for stories, we unleash the power that lies inside every book. We liberate the array of voices that need to be heard and the scenes that need to be seen. Let freedom read!


ADDED AT 10 am PST:



The following sites updated:





Posted by at

Wednesday, September 13, 2023

BLACK POWER MEDIA, Paul Rudnick and that stinky Doo-Doo DeSantis

First up, BLACK POWER MEDIA's REMIX MORNING SHOW.



Loved the episode and I love this Tweet from Paul Rudnick.



Now it's time for Doo-Doo, that ugly stain inside America's shorts.  




Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis wouldn’t rule out launching missiles into Mexico to combat drug cartels if he’s elected president, saying that it’s “dependent on the situation.”

In a tense exchange with CBS Evening News’ Norah O’Donnell, the presidential hopeful was directly asked whether he would authorize an aerial attack inside the neighboring country. He began to respond, then pivoted.

“We would use all available — the tactics, I think, can be debated. If you have something you want to accomplish, people would brief you on the different ways you’d be able to do it,” DeSantis said. “So, that would be dependent on the situation.”

It’s the first time DeSantis, the most outspoken 2024 GOP presidential candidate when it comes to using military force at the border, has explicitly said he’d be open to using missiles against the southern neighbor. At the presidential debate in August, he said he would send U.S. special forces over the border — a statement that a campaign spokesperson later eased back to POLITICO.



The man is nuts.  He's not fit to be a dog catcher, let alone a governor.  And he's sure not fit to be president.  BUZZLOVING notes:


Ron DeSantis complained that the media hates him, and now the media fired back with an interesting question, “Is it in the media or the candidate?”

While on Fox News, DeSantis told host Will Cain, “I’m running to win in January and February. I’m not running to juice polling now.”
Instead of promoting his campaign, he continued, “I’ve also been attacked more than anybody, as you know,” adding, “Donald Trump has spent over 20 million [dollars] attacking me — that’s more than he spent supporting Republican candidates in last year’s midterm elections.”
Lincoln Project senior adviser Tara Setmayer talked to MSNBC’s Jonathan Capehart on “The Saturday Show” and explained that DeSantis’ complaints are “embarrassing.”
The host asked, “Ron DeSantis is saying one of the things he’s blaming for his inability to close the polling gap with Donald Trump is that it’s the media’s fault. We are covering his campaign so negatively. Is that the problem? Is it in the media or the candidate?” Setmayer answered, “The problem is the candidate. I’ve never seen a bunch of whiners like this in my life.”

Doo-Doo is a big whiner.  Meanwhile, CNBC notes:


  • Ron DeSantis is set to be hosted by Wall Street executives and a top lawyer for a fundraising breakfast on Thursday in New York.
  • DeSantis will later attend a lunch hosted by Emil Henry, the CEO of private equity firm Tiger Infrastructure Partners.
  • DeSantis' fundraising trip to New York comes as he continues lagging behind former President Donald Trump in the polls.


You don't have to be Donald Trump to say Doo-Doo's going over to the 'deep state.'  

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


Wednesday, September 13, 2023.  Julian Assange remains persecuted, Glenneth Greenwald continues to (mal)pracitce law, when you run for Congress and took money to conduct sex acts online there's no privacy shield there, Moqtada and his supporters get no punishment while Iraqi police officers get a slap on the wrist, and much more.



Starting with Julian Assagne.


Julian Assange remains persecuted, held for no real reason with no real charges in the UK while the US works to extradite him and charge him with the 'crime' of truth telling.  

After years and years, finally Australian politicians are listening to the Australian people somewhat.  A delegation of members of Parliament will be visiting the US later this month to lobby for the US government to end the persecution of Julian.  One of those MPs is Monique Ryan and she writes:

In 2006 Assange – a former computer hacker turned editor, activist and publisher – founded Wikileaks, a non-profit online document archive. In 2010, WikiLeaks published a trove of US intelligence about American activities in Iraq and Afghanistan. That data had been leaked by a US intelligence officer, Chelsea Manning, who was subsequently charged by the US government with 22 offences including violating the US Espionage Act and aiding the enemy. She pled guilty to 10 charges but was imprisoned for only three years before her sentence was commuted by President Obama in 2017.

The many tranches of documents released by Wikileaks were damaging and embarrassing for the US intelligence services; hence their ongoing, relentless attempts to secure Assange’s extradition to the US from the UK to face charges under the Espionage Act. Politically, the Democrats’ dislike of Assange was not helped by WikiLeaks 2016 publication of Hillary Clinton’s emails and documents from the Democratic National Committee. WikiLeaks subsequent release of the largest CIA leak in history in 2017 won Assange no friends in the Trump administration.

Assange has been an inmate of the UK’s Belmarsh Prison (dubbed “Britain’s Guantanamo Bay”) since April 2019, having previously taken refuge within the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for almost 7 years. The US-UK Treaty under which Assange’s extradition is being sought explicitly bans extradition for political offences, but the proceedings continue despite the obvious political overtones of this case. Daniel Ellsberg, leaker of the Pentagon Papers exposing US misconduct in the Vietnam War, was also prosecuted under the Espionage Act. Ellsberg, whose case was dismissed with prejudice. Ellsberg described Assange’s prosecution as a greater abuse of process than his own. Assange’s position has been defended by the former United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, media and human rights organisations, and politicians from around the world.

Assange’s lawyer, London-based Australian Jennifer Robinson, has argued that his indictment represented “the most terrifying threat to freedom of speech in the 21st-century”. When she spoke at the National Press Club last year, Ms Robinson repeatedly referred to claims that in 2017 the CIA plotted to kidnap or assassinate Assange while he was a political refugee in London. She suggested that, if extradited, he might be subjected to Special Administrative Measures, a regime of extreme isolation described by human rights groups as inhumane and possibly amounting to torture.

There is some urgency to this mission because of the imminent possibility of Mr Assange’s extradition to the US, and his deteriorating physical and mental health. He had a minor stroke in 2021 and is described by family members as increasingly frail. His wife, Stella, has stated that she believes he will commit suicide if extradited to maximum security conditions in the US.

There have been mixed messages from the US Government this year: Caroline Kennedy, the US Ambassador to Australia flagged a possible plea deal in August. More recently, however, the US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, stipulated that “The actions that he has alleged to have committed risked very serious harm to our national security, to the benefit of our adversaries, and put named human sources at grave risk – grave risk – of physical harm, and grave risk of detention.”

President Biden is perhaps constrained in his ability to intervene in this case by the ongoing legal cases against his predecessor and his son. The president has indicated that he is “committed to an independent Department of Justice”, but the commuting of Chelsea Manning’s sentence by President Obama seems at odds with the Biden administration’s ongoing pursuit of Assange. This is especially true given the absence of repercussions for the major newspapers which published the Wikileaks documents – media organisations like the Guardian, New York Times, Der Spiegel and Le Monde.




Turning to Iraq, a sentencing and what passes for 'justice.'  Following an Iraqi refugee burning a Quran in Sweden, a judicial verdict has been reached.  AFP reports:



An Iraqi court gave 18 police officers jail sentences of up to three years Tuesday for failing to stop protesters storming and torching Sweden's embassy in Baghdad, security officials said. 
Supporters of the powerful Shi'ite Muslim cleric Moqtada Sadr set the Swedish embassy in Baghdad alight on the night of July 20, after a Stockholm-based Iraqi refugee desecrated the Koran in Stockholm.


Three years?  That's a joke but then so is refusing to punish the rioters who attacked the embassy and portly, plus-size model Moqtada al-Sadr who sicked his cult on the embassy.  Nothing was achieved with this 'verdict' and certainly justice was not restored.  

And "up to three years."  THE NATIONAL explains that sentence didn't even go to all 18, "Eight police received three-year jail terms, seven were given two years and three months, and three were sentenced to 18 months in prison, an Interior Ministry official confirmed."

That was July.  Earlier this month, in Kirkuk, 'violence' ensued.  Turns out, the four dead and the many wounded?  That violence was likely carried out by Iraqi security forces.  COUNTERVORTEX explains:

Iraqi security forces appear to have opened fire on demonstrators without prior warning in Kirkuk on Sept. 2, killing at least four people and injuring 16, Human Rights Watch has found. The violence comes amid months of increasing tensions between Kirkuk’s Kurdish, Arab and Turkmen populations. An inquiry into the incident opened by Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani should be independent and impartial in its investigation of allegations of excessive use of deadly force by Iraqi security forces, HRW urged. “Time and again, the Iraqi government has responded to protests with lethal force and arrests of journalists,” said HRW Iraq researcher Sarah Sanbar. “The government needs to take concrete steps that result in accountability for these actions.”

The tensions center around a building in Kirkuk that once served as the headquarters of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), the largest party in the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). The building has been occupied by Iraqi federal security forces since 2017, when central government forces seized Kirkuk in response to the Kurdish independence referendum. The tensions flared after Prime Minister al-Sudani ordered the return of the building to the KDP on Sept. 1 under an agreement made with the KRG when al-Sudani formed his government in October 2022.


Meanwhile, in the US, efforts at censorship and spreading hate continue.  Hate merchants like Katie Halper and Matt Taibbi, Max Blumenthal, John Stuaber, et al pretend to be concerned about censorship -- at least when they feel their inbred right wing buddies are being censored.  But when it's the kids of America?  They don't give a damn.   Hunter Buchheit (TEEN VOGUE) reports:


The silence on a recent sunny Friday morning outside Walton High School was broken by a car horn. I stood there, holding a sign that said, “You Can’t Love Freedom and Ban Books,” and watched the culprit in a tan minivan peel out of the parking lot and into the road in front of us. “Ban the perverts!” the driver screamed out her window. She was dressed in workoutwear, ponytail pulled tight, and sunglasses concealing most of her face.

Around me, on the sidewalk in front of the school’s carpool entrance, were adults and a few of my classmates with a smattering of signs, books scattered at our feet, and a “Read Banned Books” flag waving in the air. We were there that August morning to take a stand against the removal of several books from Cobb County school shelves. Normally, books are reviewed for violations after a parent complaint. As WSBTV reported, these were removed after Libs of TikTok, a right-wing social media account operated by former real estate agent Chaya Raichik, contacted county officials, concerned over the books’ “pornographic” subject matter.

One of the two banned books is Flamer, a graphic novel detailing the experiences of Aiden, the queer main character, at Boy Scouts camp in the summer between middle and high school. Taking inspiration from author Mike Curato’s own childhood, Flamer features sexual plot points integral to Aidan’s coming-of-age experience, but there are no visual depictions of genitalia or any other overtly explicit images. The other is Jesse Andrews’s Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, a frequently banned book about a teen boy who befriends a girl who is dying of leukemia. It has been criticized for containing some sex scenes.

One of my fellow dissenters at the August 25th protest was Becky Albertalli, the author of the Simonverse novels, the first of which was adapted into the 2018 film Love, Simon.

When I spoke with Albertalli after the protest, she talked about the positive reactions we received from onlookers driving by, “People were so thrilled to receive books. Parents rolling down their windows and taking it all very seriously. Truck drivers waving in solidarity.”

Still, she says, she was most concerned about the parents who expressed their fury — not behind a screen, but directly to our faces. They were, Albertalli said, “real people with their full chest and whole face, shouting at their kids’ classmates’ parents.”

Amid the mix of support and shouting, one group was conspicuously absent: teachers themselves. A few weeks ago, Katie Rinderle,  a teacher at Due West Elementary School, was fired after reading My Shadow is Purple, a children’s book that discusses gender identity, to her fifth-grade class. She bought the book at the school’s book fair.

Soon after, Cobb County superintendent Chris Ragsdale recommended that she be fired and a tribunal composed of three former school principals convened. Although they found that Rinderle demonstrated a lack of judgment, the tribunal determined that Rinderle should keep her job. But she was fired anyway.

For Georgia, this type of state-sanctioned classroom intervention isn’t new. Laws passed in recent years have set the bar for governmental overreach in schools, like House Bill 1084, passed in 2022, which targets the teaching of vague “divisive concepts.”



KENDALL CIESEMIER [00:00:01] From the ACLU, this is At Liberty. I’m Kendall Ciesemier, your host. Welcome back to At Liberty! We missed you so much in the month of August. We’re so happy to be back with you and we’re excited to bring you some really important stories impacting students over the next few weeks. Back-to-school season is upon us, and here at the ACLU, we’ve been following the nationwide campaign to censor education. Be that the censorship of important historical and social context in school curriculums or the recent rise in book bans. All of these efforts threaten students’ right to learn. As we chart this issue our eyes are squarely on Texas. The state is banning more books than any other, eliminating libraries and through these decisions, targeting low income students of color. This year, some students in the Houston Independent School District—the largest district in the state of Texas—may be headed to schools with no libraries or librarians. In August, the state announced plans to convert libraries into disciplinary centers, eliminating librarian positions at 28 elementary and middle schools. Another 57 schools are being assessed for the same outcome, with the goal of “addressing low academic performance in certain schools.” This alarming change comes as part of a sweeping reform program led by the Houston Independent School District’s new superintendent, Mike Miles, and a new state imposed school board, both which replaced the district’s formally elected school board and superintendent in the spring.

FOX 26 HOUSTON [00:01:54] They say cut back. We say fight back. That fight back. The idea of turning a library into a detention room is nuts. And here’s what I’d say not only to the superintendent, to the board, would any of you put your children in a school that does not have a library? Hell no.

KENDALL [00:02:17] The situation in Houston signals what’s been happening and what’s also to come in schools across the country. Attacks on the freedom to read are on the rise, threatening the vital jobs of librarians. Despite this, librarians are still holding out hope and taking action.

BECKY CALZADA [00:02:39] Hello, my name is Becky Calzada. I’m a district library coordinator in a suburban school district northwest of Austin, Texas. I’ve been a library coordinator for just over ten years and a librarian for about 20. But I am starting my 36th year as a public education teacher, so I’m just thankful to be here.

DEBORAH HALL [00:02:59] My name is Deborah Hall and I started as a school librarian in 1972. Teachers were on strike and I had to cross the picket line to get to my first job. And I have been with Houston ISD for my entire career, serving in several libraries, and eventually I became the library technology administrator for the district.

KENDALL [00:03:27] Today, we’ll hear from Becky and Deborah about the value of librarians and what they’re doing to advocate for their profession. Then we’ll hear from the ACLU of Texas attorney Chloe Kempf, who will help us understand how the rise in education censorship infringes on students’ civil rights.

KENDALL [00:03:48] You both have decades of experience as librarians. And so I can imagine how frustrating it is to be both facing threats to your profession, but also to the entire function of what a library serves in schools. Deborah, I’ll start with you since you spent about 40 years as a librarian in the Houston Independent School District, which, as you know, has recently made headlines due to the changes being made to school libraries there. Can you explain to us what’s happening to libraries and librarians in Houston?

DEBORAH [00:04:26] One of the first things we heard from the new superintendent was “all librarians do is check out books.” And “I need this space because I’m going to be corralling a lot of kids who are not behaving. And then once they get themselves under control, they can go back to class.” That label of changing a wonderful room of learning to a detention center. And that’s what it’s been called a punishment center, a detention center.

KENDALL [00:04:55] What’s your understanding from being on the ground there?

DEBORAH [00:04:58] It’s all about test scores, that is the target. That’s why supposedly Houston ISD was targeted because of low test scores in certain schools. We’re a large, primarily urban school district with a very diverse population, but those schools weren’t performing that well on the state test. And so the district became vulnerable to takeover. And that is what happened 12—almost 12 weeks into a takeover by the state that removed our board and hired a superintendent who is not certified and who had a failing agenda in his last run at being a superintendent. And we’re under the gun to do his bidding. Communication is limited and a lot of things are happening behind closed doors. The teachers and librarians and various personnel are not encouraged to share information, so it’s not really forthcoming. In some cases, furniture is going to the warehouse, books are being boxed up. Children at those schools will not have access to the library as we knew it.

KENDALL [00:06:21] These changes are taking place in a district where nearly 80% of students are economically disadvantaged and students of color make up an overwhelming majority of the district’s enrolled population. The largest groups being Black and Hispanic students who account for 84%. But westward just outside of Austin, Texas, we see a different side of the story. There Becky works in a district where libraries are changing for the better and where white students make up more than half of the enrolled population.

BECKY [00:06:53] I think just like other libraries, we’ve had experiences with, you know, issues with censorship and that sort of thing, too. But in terms of changes, if we’ve had any changes, it’s been because we’re actually adding some programming to our campuses. So I know Deborah mentioned, you know, about there being books, and of course libraries will always have books, but we recently had a bond passage passed a couple of years ago. And so that bond package allowed us to bring some 3-D printers into our libraries. And it’s also going to bring some iMac computers so that we can do some video production. And this will be all elementary, middle and high school campuses. So this allows us to provide that kind of equipment at no cost to the kids, but also to allow them to have access, to build and create and think outside the box.

KENDALL [00:07:44] But what has impacted predominantly white schools, like the one where Becky works is a flurry of book bans. The bans are particularly targeting books written by LGBTQ+ and nonwhite authors or books that discuss the experience of people from marginalized groups. With all of this, school libraries and librarians have been thrown into the political fray, and Becky and Deborah are having to learn how to contend with that.

DEBORAH [00:08:12] These kinds of controversies can—when librarians and libraries are targeted because of what kinds of books we might have on the shelf or what we may be teaching. It’s scary. It’s concerning. But we just need to stick together and work to change the view and to erase the negativity and, you know, the contrast like in Houston to libraries, some libraries become a detention centers when before they were sanctuaries, you know, they were places where kids got support for learning, for social emotional support. It was a place where a student could get connected to other people, to a caring adult. It was a place where they could be listened to. And we have to counter with the reality and not the imagined evils that are lurking. Tyranny of the minority. The loudest voice is making decisions, and there’s a lot of silence that needs to be awakened and voices brought forward. Because if people knew what was happening, they would speak out. But so many people are not aware of it.

KENDALL [00:09:45] I’m wondering, you know, as educators yourselves, you both speak so beautifully and clearly about the value that libraries, librarians give to students. And I think people would be surprised to hear about all the ways that librarians support students. What would you want to say about the role of the librarian and the role of libraries and all the ways that libraries support students today?



The last thing the country needs is less libraries.  And grasp that Hunter and other young people around the country have been fighting censorship and doing so without any help from the so-called 'independent media' of YOUTUBE.  They're too busy sucking up to Tucker Carlson who is calling for the National Guard to shoot people from the Texas border.  That's who they stand with, not the children of America fighting the fight that these YOUTUBERs should have been leading.


They have plenty of time for nonsense, though.  For creating it and spreading it and being 100% wrong, yes, we are talking about Glenneth Greenwald.  We need to turn to a story Rebecca covered yesterday:





A Democratic candidate vying for a House of Delegates seat is under criticism after videos were allegedly found of her performing sex acts with her husband for tips.

The Washington Post was the first to report about several videos it says show Susanna Gibson and her husband performing sexual acts on a live website called Chaturbate. She neither confirms nor denies the online activity but calls the entire situation an invasion of privacy.

Gibson is running against David Owen in the 57th District, which encompasses parts of Henrico and Goochland counties. With less than 8 weeks until election day, The Post says these live Chaturbate broadcasts were recorded and put onto another website. Allegedly, Gibson, in the videos, is asking viewers for tips to perform certain acts.

The newspaper was tipped off by a Republican operative, who is said to have no ties to Gibson’s opponent.



I'm sure this is embarrassing for the woman.  But it's not a violation of anyone's privacy.  The videos were streamed live on CHATURBATE -- a porn site.  Sorry, you're an adult performer.  

You may be other things and I certainly don't condemn adult performers.  Conner Habib is a great guy, for example.  But if Conner ran for the House of Representatives and someone came out announcing he was an adult performer, they would not be violating his privacy.


The great Glenneth Greenwald, as Rebecca notes, insisted this was an invasion of privacy.  No.  Taking a photo of Jack Nicholson on his balcony to embarrass him -- taking it from a long distance away -- is an invasion of privacy in my opinion but in the eyes of the law it's not.  So you certainly give up any reasonable right to privacy when you broadcast yourself in a film online.  They made it a public act when they utilized Chaturbate.  


"I didn't know anyone was recording!"

Well, sorry, that's your problem.  You knew you were broadcasting yourself having sex and you should have known anyone could have recorded it and/or taking screen shots.  Your stupidity is not a valid legal defense.


Alex Griffing (MEDIAITE) notes, "A candidate in a high-stakes legislative contest in Virginia had sex with her husband in live videos posted on a pornographic website and asked viewers to pay them money in return for carrying out specific sex acts."


So she did do it for money.  


Sorry, Glenneth, it was never a privacy issue to begin with -- I'm so very glad you no longer practice law in the US -- but it was a source of income which makes it a job and, no, work history has no right to privacy in any instance but especially not when we're discussing someone running for higher office, someone running for public office.


Glenneth is an idiot and always will be one.  Starting to get why he's always wrong whenever he wades in with a legal opinion?  Some of us noted that reality back in 2005.



Can she win office?  Possibly.  Should she?  In terms of the Democratic Party, no.  Any thing she does in office, any thing she votes for or proposes will be under intense scrutiny.  If she'd come out and said, "Look, I did it.  Get over it." -- if she'd done that I might feel differently.  But her  mealy mouthed response indicates she can't handle pressure and she's just going to create a problem for the Democratic Party for the next two years if she makes it into office.


That said, the judges are the voters -- not the Democratic Party.  They'll determine whether or not to back her.



Let's now turn to stupidity on the campaign trail -- that of Chris Christie (seeking the GOP's presidential nomination) and that of MEDIAITE.  At MEDIAITE, right-wing troll Isaac Schorr writes:


MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski scoffed at former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s suggestion that his state allows abortion through nine months of pregnancy on Tuesday morning.

While making the case for state-by-state regulation of abortion law during an appearance on Morning Joe, Christie compared states with more restrictive statutes to New Jersey, which he said allowed “abortion up to nine months.”

“Okay, it’s not an abortion at nine months,” asserted an exasperated Brzezinski, “and there’s not a doctor that would do it, and it only happens in extremely severe circumstances. You can come back and bring me the evidence of women across the state of New Jersey having abortions in the ninth month. It’s not happening, Chris, come on.”

“You said this the last time you were on and I let it go, I can’t let it go again,” she added. “There’s no abortions in the ninth month.”

If that’s true — if no one would ever consider an abortion in the later stages of pregnancy — why did New Jersey’s state legislature pass and governor sign a bill ensuring that abortions could be performed at any stage of pregnancy last year?

The 2022 Freedom of Reproductive Choice Act argued that “governmental restrictions on reproductive choice, by their very nature, impinge on the constitutional right to reproductive autonomy” and included a provision stating that “Any law, rule, regulation, ordinance, or order, in effect on or adopted after the effective date of this act, that is determined to have the effect of limiting the constitutional right to freedom of reproductive choice and that does not conform with the provisions and the express or implied purposes of this act, shall be deemed invalid and shall have no force or effect.”



Let's bring some reality to this.  Isaac, I don't now if your mother should have had an abortion but I do know she should have your ears pinned back.  They're the only thing more ridiculous than your writing.   


Mika's right.  That is not what the law says.  It's the interpretation Chris Christie gives to it and that the idiot at MEDIAITE gives to it.  The law has no such writing in it.  An interpretation is just that and only that.  A court would have to rule on it.  The law itself does not say what Chris Christie says it says.  Or what MEDIAITE lies and says it says.  

Do we not the difference between an interpretation and a ruling?  Are we that stupid as a country?  

If it's not in the law, if it's not written into a law, if the wording is not there, it's open to interpretation.  That's why courts often have to rule on laws that seem so clear to lawmakers but, in fact, is not as clear.






The following sites updated:





Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)