Friday, May 26, 2017

Weekend Humor

A priest, a doctor, and an engineer were waiting one morning for a particularly slow group of golfers. The engineer fumed, "What's with those guys? We must have been waiting for fifteen minutes!"
The doctor chimed in, "I don't know, but I've never seen such inept golfers!"
The priest said, "Here comes the green-keeper. Let's have a word with him." 
He said, "Hello George, what's wrong with that group ahead of us? They're rather... slow, aren't they?" 
The green-keeper replied, "Oh, yes. That's a group of blind firemen. They lost their sight saving our clubhouse from a fire last year, so we always let them play for free anytime."

The group fell silent for a moment. 

The priest said, "That's so sad. I think I will say a special prayer for them tonight." 

The doctor said, "Good idea. I'm going to contact my ophthalmologist colleague and see if there's anything he can do for them."

The engineer said, "Why can't they play at night?"

Everyone enjoy this holiday weekend!

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Innocent,but Still Guilty

While we were all watching Donald Trump's Shenanigans...Betty Shelby, the police officer who shot Terrence Crutcher last year ,while his hands were up was acquitted of Manslaughter charges...

Of course she used the excuse...The textbook excuse...I was afraid for my life of the scary and big black man..And a jury of nine whites and three blacks went along with it....

"The jury concluded that any officer put in that situation at that exact moment and regardless of the skin color, gender or size of the suspect, would have performed the same way, which is in accordance with their law enforcement training," wrote the foreman, who was not identified by name.
The foreman emphasized officer Betty Shelby's training throughout the three-page letter, which was made public through the court system "to placate the desire of various media members to interview members of the jury."

Betty Shelby had been charged with felony manslaughter in the September 16, 2016, death of Terrence Crutcher -- a shooting captured on video and seen across the nation. She was found not guilty on Wednesday of last week.

Could Taser have been used?

The jurors -- nine white and three black -- deliberated nine hours. They asked the judge to allow them to explain their thinking in open court but he said they could do that after court adjourned.
Agreement did not come easy, the foreperson wrote.

Some jurors "could never get comfortable" with saying Shelby was blameless in the death because it appeared she could have used a Taser in the moments before Crutcher reached into the vehicle, the letter said.I'm not comfortable with this!

"However, there was no evidence presented that her extensive training allowed such an option," the letter said. "The jury could not, beyond a reasonable doubt, conclude that she did anything outside of her duties and training as a police officer in that situation." BULLSHIT!!!

During cross-examination, Assistant Tulsa County District Attorney Kevin Gray asked Shelby why she didn't use her Taser.

Shelby said she believed her gun was an appropriate level of force. She said she "thought he [Crutcher] had a gun" because he repeatedly put his hands in and out of his pockets and reached inside of his car window. Shelby said she "didn't have time to pull out her Taser." Again..I call BULLSHIT!

The jury foreman's letter said the shooting was "unfortunate and tragic, but justifiable due to the actions of the suspect." And for the third time I call BULLSHIT!! When will they stop with this madness?

''Show me your hands''

The shooting happened after Crutcher's SUV was found stalled in the middle of the street. A witness called 911 and said a man was running away from the vehicle, warning it was going to blow up.

Officer Shelby testified she arrived on the scene and approached the vehicle and cleared it, not seeing anyone inside.

As she turned back to her patrol car, she saw Crutcher walking toward her, alternately putting his hands in his pockets and in the air, she said.

Crutcher did not comply with her commands to "show me your hands," she testified. She also said he was sweating heavily and smelled of PCP chemicals. I didn't know that you could smell PCP! 

Crutcher ignored orders from Shelby and another officer on the scene, Tyler Turnbough, according to Shelby's testimony. She testified that Crutcher put his hands on the SUV and moved to reach into the vehicle.

Her police training taught her that "if a suspect reaches their hands inside of a car, don't let them pull them out," she testified. There was blood smeared on the window...Showing the window was up and he could not have been reaching inside for anything!

At that point, Shelby fired her weapon and Turnbough fired his Taser, she testified. Crutcher, 40, was found to be unarmed after the shooting.

Back to work....

Officer Shelby will return to work with the Tulsa police effective Sunday, department spokeswoman Jeanne MacKenzie told CNN on Friday. She will be assigned a non-patrol position.

If she'd been convicted, Shelby could have been sentenced to between four years and life in prison in the death of Crutcher, a father of four girls.

The killing of Crutcher was one of a number of police shootings of unarmed black men across the United States in recent years that have heightened concerns about possible police misconduct.


Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Then Think Again


Monday, May 22, 2017

Friday, May 19, 2017

Weekend Humor

In a long line of people waiting for a bank teller, one guy suddenly started massaging the back of the person in front of him.

Surprised, the man in front turned and snarled, "Just what the hell are you doing?"

"Well," said the guy, "You see, I'm a massage therapist and I could see that you were tense, so I had to massage your back. Sometimes I just can't help practicing my art!" 

"That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard!" the guy replied.

"I work for the IRS. Do you see me screwing the guy in front of me?"


Thursday, May 18, 2017

Walk Off

Recently, a number of Statues that remember the old south...The Civil War....The Confederacy have been removed....For the most part this has been done with little fanfare or hue and cry, but in some places...Resistance to this has grown....A group of torch bearing folks recently surrounded one such Confederate statue and refused to allow it to be removed...

They screamed that they were ''Destroying our history" Really? I wonder if they realize ,the south lost the Civil War?

After hours of at times emotional debate, the Louisiana House voted Monday in favor of a bill aimed at protecting Confederate monuments across the state.

The Bill, sponsored by Rep. Thomas Carmody, R-Shreveport, advanced with a vote of 65-31. The entire Legislative Black Caucus voted against it.

Carmody's bill bars local governments and municipalities from removing plaques and statues to military figures and events. The monuments could only be torn down following a vote by the public.

"My bill in its current posture is a perfect exercise of democracy. It allows for the people to have their input in the decision to remove military monuments from the public spaces in which they live," Carmody argued on the House floor.

Just recently, New Orleans tore down the first two of four Confederate monuments after a vote by the City Council.

Several Democrats - especially members of the black caucus - spoke out against the Carmody's bill, calling it "offensive."

For the Sake of Argument...I wonder if Germany has any monuments to Adolf Hitler? He's part of their history..

"In my city, the City of New Orleans, should we have a statue or memorial for someone who fought for my enslavement? Who fought for my disenfranchisement?" asked Rep. Gary Carter, D-New Orleans. "That's what you're saying, that those people ought to be honored and recognized?"

After the vote, all African American members walked off the House floor in protest.

The black caucus planned a news conference yesterday morning. The legislation now goes to the state Senate.

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

White House In Peril

 He fired FBI Director James Comey last week...Then had two Russian officials at the White House in a closed door meeting the NEXT DAY...and now it is alleged that he told them confidential information..

Seems like every week the barometer of crazy gets higher with this guy and it's only been little over 100 days...

I'm already exhausted...How about you?

The Trump White House is dealing with its second crisis in one week, now that President Trump has basically confirmed that he shared highly classified information with Russia.

As we move forward and the White House seeks to explain itself, here are three key takeaways.
1) The White House is treading water badly — and the problem is largely Donald Trump himself
Chaos has long reigned in the White House. And never has that been truer than in the past week.

President Trump badly mismanaged the firing of FBI Director James B. Comey and the explanations that followed. His spokespeople offered polar-opposite versions of both the motive (first it was Comey's handling of the Clinton investigation, then Trump admitted that the Russia probe was on his mind) and how the decision was made (first it was the Justice Department's call, then Trump said he had made up his mind to fire Comey regardless).

We see a strikingly similar script this week, with top national security aides saying Monday night that The Washington Post's reporting was wrong, and then Trump tacitly acknowledging it was accurate first thing Tuesday morning.

The common thread here is clear: No matter how much planning goes into the White House's actions and messaging — and I'm not really sure there's a ton of it, to be honest — President Trump is liable to blow it up at a moment's notice.

Get this, President Trump(God, I hate saying that!) is reportedly considering a staff shake-up to address the White House's current problems, but is a different cast of characters really going to be able to change things?

President Trump first got them into these messes by firing Comey in a questionable manner, and then, the very next day, sharing classified information with none other than Russia. He then compounded those mistakes by contradicting his own staff in both cases.

What really needs changing is President Trump's tendency to fly off the handle and then contradict his own staff, his own spokespeople. And the only staff that are going to be successful with him are the ones who can actually rein him in and convince him that he needs to listen to someone not named Donald Trump. I'm not sure those people exist.

"Who can check me boo?" comes to mind!

2) There is no good defense for what Trump did
Trump's defense of what he did Tuesday morning seemed to boil down to this: The president has broad authority to share such information.

And this is true. President Trump very likely didn't break the law. But this is also a red herring.
Even in the story Monday, The Washington Post's Greg Miller and Greg Jaffe acknowledged that President Trump probably didn't break any laws.

The reason this is a big deal to the intelligence community sources they spoke to is because it risks jeopardizing a key tool in the fight against the Islamic State by tipping Russia off to this information.

 By discussing a specific ISIS plot and the city in which it was detected, the officials say, it's quite possible Russia could surmise the source and methods used to collect that information.

In addition to aiding an adversarial foreign power like Russia and potentially jeopardizing a key source, it could also give other allies cold feet about working with the U.S. government, for fear that their identities won't be closely safeguarded by the president and his administration.

3.) The impeachment push will grow, almost definitely in vain
A couple of House Democrats have now called for Trump's impeachment — Reps. Maxine Waters (Calif.) and Al Green (Tex.) — and a number of others are talking openly about the possibility, including Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) and the former front-runner for the Democratic National Committee chairmanship, Rep. Keith Ellison (Minn.).
(CNN's K-File has the growing list Democrats who have invoked the i-word.)

Democratic leaders will certainly be wary of all this, given that Republicans paid a price in the late 1990s for their overzealous impeachment of Bill Clinton. And trying to impeach Trump while in the minority is almost definitely a fool's errand. But the big question here is whether they can hold off their base's growing demand for it.
A new survey from Democratic-leaning automated pollster Public Policy Polling released Tuesday, in fact, showed that 48 percent of registered voters in North Carolina support bringing impeachment proceedings against Trump, vs. 41 percent who opposed it. Three-fourths of Democrats (75 percent) were in favor.

As The Post's Philip Bump noted on Twitter, there is reason to believe these numbers overshoot actual support for impeachment — specifically the fact that the poll shows 12 percent of Trump voters support impeachment — but it's clear that there is a healthy amount of momentum behind impeachment on the left.

We saw during the Supreme Court debate what that pressure from the base can do. Democrats were essentially forced into a symbolic filibuster against Neil M. Gorsuch that they knew would just lead Republicans to nuke the filibuster for SCOTUS nominations. And now they don't have the filibuster for future, more consequential fights.

Sharing classified information with Russia that risks jeopardizing a key tool in the fight against ISIS would seem to be a uniquely galvanizing event for the pro-impeachment crowd.
And the Lawfare blog recapped the legal case for it late Monday, pointing to the Presidential Oath of Office. This is a lot of info, but it's well worth a read:
If the President gave this information away through carelessness or neglect, he has arguably breached his oath of office. As Quinta and Ben have elaborated on in some detail, in taking the oath President Trump swore to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States” and to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” to the best of his ability. It’s very hard to argue that carelessly giving away highly sensitive material to an adversary foreign power constitutes a faithful execution of the office of President.
Violating the oath of office does not require violating a criminal statute. If the President decided to write the nuclear codes on a sticky note on his desk and then took a photo of it and tweeted it, he would not technically have violated any criminal law — just as he hasn’t here. He has the constitutional authority to dictate that the safeguarding of nuclear materials shall be done through sticky notes in plain sight and tweeted, even the authority to declassify the codes outright. Yet, we would all understand this degree of negligence to be a gross violation of his oath of office.

Congress has alleged oath violations — albeit violations tied to criminal allegations or breaches of statutory obligations — all three times it has passed or considered seriously articles of impeachment against presidents: against Andrew Johnson (“unmindful of the high duties of his oath of office”), Richard Nixon (“contrary to his oath”), and Bill Clinton (“in violation of his constitutional oath”). Further, two of the three articles of impeachment against Nixon alleged no direct violation of the law. Instead, they concerned Nixon’s abuse of his power as President, which, like the President putting the nuclear codes on Twitter, is an offense that can only be committed by the President and has thus never been explicitly prohibited in criminal law.
There’s thus no reason why Congress couldn’t consider a grotesque violation of the President’s oath as a stand-alone basis for impeachment — a high crime and misdemeanor in and of itself. This is particularly plausible in a case like this, where the oath violation involves giving sensitive information to an adversary foreign power. That’s getting relatively close to the “treason” language in the impeachment clauses; it’s pretty easy to imagine a hybrid impeachment article alleging a violation of the oath in service of a hostile foreign power. So legally speaking, the matter could be very grave for Trump even though there is no criminal exposure.
It's not hard to imagine Democrats reading that and getting very enthused about impeachment.
bottom line...

Only Republicans can stop Trump!   It's up to the rest of us to see to it that they do!

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

And This Might Bury Him


President Trump asked the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, to shut down the federal investigation into Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, in an Oval Office meeting in February, according to a memo that Mr. Comey wrote shortly after the meeting.

“I hope you can let this go,” the president told Mr. Comey, according to the memo.

The existence of Mr. Trump’s request is the clearest evidence that the president has tried to directly influence the Justice Department and F.B.I. investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia.

Mr. Comey wrote the memo detailing his conversation with the president immediately after the meeting, which took place the day after Mr. Flynn resigned, according to two people who read the memo. The memo was part of a paper trail Mr. Comey created documenting what he perceived as the president’s improper efforts to influence an ongoing investigation. An F.B.I. agent’s contemporaneous notes are widely held up in court as credible evidence of conversations.

Mr. Comey shared the existence of the memo with senior F.B.I. officials and close associates. The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of the memo to a Times reporter.

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey, according to the memo. “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey that Mr. Flynn had done nothing wrong, according to the memo.
Mr. Comey did not say anything to Mr. Trump about curtailing the investigation, only replying: “I agree he is a good guy.”

In a statement, the White House denied the version of events in the memo.

“While the president has repeatedly expressed his view that General Flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country, the president has never asked Mr. Comey or anyone else to end any investigation, including any investigation involving General Flynn,” the statement said. “The president has the utmost respect for our law enforcement agencies, and all investigations. This is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and Mr. Comey.”

In testimony to the Senate last week, the acting F.B.I. director, Andrew G. McCabe, said, “There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date.”

A spokesman for the F.B.I. declined to comment.

Mr. Comey created similar memos — including some that are classified — about every phone call and meeting he had with the president, the two people said. It is unclear whether Mr. Comey told the Justice Department about the conversation or his memos.

Mr. Trump fired Mr. Comey last week. Trump administration officials have provided multiple, conflicting accounts of the reasoning behind Mr. Comey’s dismissal. Mr. Trump said in a television interview that one of the reasons was because he believed “this Russia thing” was a “made-up story.”

The Feb. 14 meeting took place just a day after Mr. Flynn was forced out of his job after it was revealed he had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about the nature of phone conversations he had had with the Russian ambassador to the United States.

Despite the conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Comey, the investigation of Mr. Flynn has proceeded. In Virginia, a federal grand jury has issued subpoenas in recent weeks for records related to Mr. Flynn. Part of the Flynn investigation is centered on his financial ties to Russia and Turkey.
Mr. Comey had been in the Oval Office that day with other senior national security officials for a terrorism threat briefing. When the meeting ended, Mr. Trump told those present — including Mr. Pence and Attorney General Jeff Sessions — to leave the room except for Mr. Comey.

Alone in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump began the discussion by condemning leaks to the news media, saying that Mr. Comey should consider putting reporters in prison for publishing classified information, according to one of Mr. Comey’s associates. 

Mr. Trump then turned the discussion to Mr. Flynn.

After writing up a memo that outlined the meeting, Mr. Comey shared it with senior F.B.I. officials. Mr. Comey and his aides perceived Mr. Trump’s comments as an effort to influence the investigation, but they decided that they would try to keep the conversation secret — even from the F.B.I. agents working on the Russia investigation — so the details of the conversation would not affect the investigation.

Mr. Comey was known among his closest advisers to document conversations that he believed would later be called into question, according to two former confidants, who said Mr. Comey was uncomfortable at times with his relationship with Mr. Trump.

Mr. Comey’s recollection has been bolstered in the past by F.B.I. notes. In 2007, he told Congress about a now-famous showdown with senior White House officials over the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. The White House disputed Mr. Comey’s account, but the F.B.I. director at the time, Robert S. Mueller III, kept notes that backed up Mr. Comey’s story.

The White House has repeatedly crossed lines that other administrations have been reluctant to cross when discussing politically charged criminal investigations. Mr. Trump has disparaged the ongoing F.B.I. investigation as a hoax and called for an investigation into his political rivals. His representatives have taken the unusual step of declaring no need for a special prosecutor to investigate the president’s associates.

The Oval Office meeting occurred a little more than two weeks after Mr. Trump summoned Mr. Comey to the White House for a lengthy, one-on-one dinner in the residence. At that dinner, on Jan. 27, Mr. Trump asked Mr. Comey at least two times for a pledge of loyalty — which Mr. Comey declined, according to one of Mr. Comey’s associates.

In a Twitter posting on Friday, Mr. Trump said that “James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!”

After the meeting, Mr. Comey’s associates did not believe there was any way to corroborate Mr. Trump’s statements. But Mr. Trump’s suggestion last week that he was keeping tapes has made them wonder whether there are tapes that back up Mr. Comey’s account.

The Jan. 27 dinner came a day after White House officials learned that Mr. Flynn had been interviewed by F.B.I. agents about his phone calls with the Russian ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak. On Jan. 26, Acting Attorney General Sally Q. Yates told the White House counsel about the interview, and said Mr. Flynn could be subject to blackmail by the Russians because they knew he had lied about the content of the calls.

After you've taken all of this in...Think about this...If this was Former President Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton...or hell, former President Bill Clinton...Republicans would be foaming at the mouth and demanding impeachment...They impeached Bill Clinton for a sexual indiscretion....This smacks of Treason and Obstruction of Justice and not a Republican is saying a word... Further more, Trump's dumb ass followers are trying to justify it...

I said that this testimony might bury Trump....I doubt it...

How Stupid Does He Think We Are?

Monday, May 15, 2017

Friday, May 12, 2017

Weekend Humor

At school Little Johnny was told by a classmate that most adults are hiding at least one dark secret, and that this makes it very easy to blackmail them by saying, "I know the whole truth."

Little Johnny decides to go home and try it out.

He goes home, and as he is greeted by his mother he says, "I know the whole truth."

His mother quickly hands him $20 and says, "Just don't tell your father."

Quite pleased, the boy waits for his father to get home from work, and greets him with, "I know the whole truth."

The father promptly hands him $40 and says, "Please don't say a word to your mother."

Very pleased, the boy is on his way to school the next day when he sees the mailman at his front door.

The boy greets him by saying, "I know the whole truth."

The mailman immediately drops the mail, opens his arms, and says, "Then come give your real father a big hug."

Everybody have a sexilicious weekend!


"Mommy, can I go to Timmy's blog and play?"

Click on image to enlarge for reading

Click on image to enlarge for reading

Click on image to enlarge for reading