To be honest, I'm really down about what is happening in our nation--and Cannon's latest move is simply the tip of the iceberg. What with The Bloated Yam's desire to upend the Constitution, the selection of JD Vance and his stance on all the social issues, Biden's decline in the polls, and the SCOTUS decision that gave The Bloated Yam special immunity, this has turned into the summer from Hell.
Exactly! I've read they only call landlines - who has landlines? Old people. Who answers calls from numbers the don't recognize these days? Very few. Another point - women have not forgotten what happened two years ago. I still predict a massive blue tsunami!
I don't answer unknown numbers on my cell phone, either. Only if it is a business phone is anyone required to. That's what voice mail is for--and it can be virtual either way, so you don't even have to bother to call in to check.
Over 30,000 people (their max) joined Red Wine and Blue's video conference on saving our democracy with Dr. Heather Cox Richardson yesterday (including me)! Then participants split into smaller state groups to create action plans! YES!
I love HCR. However, the Republican plans to upend the election results have hit a nerve in my 83 year old body. I love Joe Biden but feel he probably should have dropped out after his debate fiasco where he clearly wasn't nimble both physically and mentally. Can he pull it out? I can only hope.
I appreciate your concern. I've managed to remain (relatively) upbeat until the past few days when I've found that my faith in Biden and the American people has certainly decreased.
I don't give any credance to the polls. If we don't wipe the RepubliCONs with their own toilet paper, someone with a better aim will get him...let's just get on with it.
But, here is the issue. How long will it take Smith to appeal? How long will it take the 11th Circuit to rule? How long will Trump's team be allowed to drag their feet on an appeal to the Supreme Court/ How long will an out of session Court take to schedule and hear the case and render a decision?
The process is going to drag out well past the election IMHO. So, she has accomplished her goal and will still sit in her courtroom for other trials. Justice delayed is justice denied. The Score is Federalist lackey 1: The public interest 0.
There seems to be something rotten in advanced legal education, as evidenced by the likes of Hawley and Cruz who got their degrees @ Harvard Law, not the sort of institution that used to advertise on matchbooks.
I don't think we can blame Harvard Law School (Hawley, Cruz) or Yale Law School (Vance). These places don't train people in idealogy or morality. They train people to be experts in understanding and exercising the law. The fact that a few people who go through that training are not only smart but also amoral and exercise the superb legal skills they gain at those schools to manipulate and pervert the law for ugly purposes is a stain on those individuals, not the schools. I'll bet there's a long list of liberal and progressive lawyers trained at Harvard and Yale who are working for the betterment of society and the protection of our democracy and our civil rights, and to save our future on this planet.
Having been through law school and practiced for years, I can attest that students DO get training in "zealous advocacy" of the client, which really is needed for our system to work. But it is way too easy to be overzealous in pursuit of "success."
And it is actually just a small part--trial practice, in your last year. Most of the time is spent learning to parse and distinguish case laws and statutes.
Those are both skills used for good or ill. Works for the clients, but is way too easy to apply to obfuscating the truth you actually know is true and, even when not dealing with clients, supporting whatever hypocrisy you want to. It is the moral character of the student, not the law school training, that determines what you do with the skills.
The part that way too many law students sleep through is legal ethics. When I took the bar, all of the questions were essay responses (basically, spot the issue and respond) EXCEPT legal ethics, which was multiple choice. This was a first. And the choices were DREADFULLY written. There were several where I knew the answer cold, and none of the choices stated it. I had to guess what the examiner must have had in mind.
I passed on lucky guesses. Something like 2/3 of the students who took that exam didn't. They had to RE-GIVE it for those who flunked.
This was back in 1982. I have no idea how the bar exam questions work now. But the whole experience hints at how the bar as a whole treats legal ethics. It is almost entirely "don't screw the client" without any real thought of "try to find the truth."
I was lucky to find a job that put me in the middle (surety--where the main thing was to look at two OTHER competing positions, and rarely have to "advocate" for my corporate client.)
Thanks for sharing your first-hand experience, Susan. I attended Yale undergrad, but knew some law students. Thank you for pointing out that while most?/all? law schools include a course on Legal Ethics, neither the schools nor the bar exam require the students to take it seriously. As the expression goes, with great power comes great responsibility. Apparently law schools teach students how to use the power tool of the law, but not nearly enough about how to wield that power ethically. Also, I suspect that even if they did strengthen their Legal Ethics requirements, you can add to someone's knowledge, but it's much harder to change their character.
Great post. Thanks. When "ethics" courses are offered in any discipline, e.g., medicine, they seem to be treated as add-ons, like "this isn't the real deal -- this is what you should know to get by."
The exception being my major, philosophy - where you can not only not fulfill the requirements without at least one ethics course, you would be hard pressed not to contend with the ethical theories of dozens of individual philosophere and philosophical movements as developed and critiqued over several thousand years!
Many of the students in my Professional Responsibility course were openly appalled by the weird arguments and assumptions of one fellow in the class, who seemingly could not fathom why conducting an affair with a client in a divorce case could possibly raise any serious ethical concerns. The professor, steady as always, patiently explained the issues via the usual Socratic method...Not sure what kind of a grade that guy ended up with, but his answers and questions to Professor Heidenreich certainly didn't help!
We can blame the big schools for letting the Heritage Foundation to take up space there, though. They vet young law students out and bring them into their fold. This was an idea Leonard Leo had years ago and it worked. He and the other white people (mostly MEN) saw the writing on the wall in the 80’s but really after we elected Obama twice. They felt that the white race was threatened, so they came up with this diabolical plan to target immigrants, Jews, Muslims, Blacks, Mexicans (and other brown folks), and Asians. Stephen Miller is the perfect Svengali for this task.
According to Wikipedia, Cohn went to Columbia for both undergrad and law school, supposedly graduating law school at age 20. I haven't checked the sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Cohn
She got her law degree at the University of Michigan, where I did a visit twice. I lived in Ann Arbor and taught at the lesser MSU. So far, I have held my tongue about her with UM profs. that I know. Still, I note that the predecessor school to MSU--Detroit College of Law--had Ivan Boesky as an alum, but he only did one year. No traitorous judges so far.
Mae, I'm curious. I spent 11 years (under-grad and grad) at The University of Hawaii Manoa. One of our buildings was Kuykendall Hall. It isn't a common surname so I'm wondering if you are a relation to OUR Kuykendall.
It's as though someone took a first year law student, plunked them down in a federal court, and said "do what you want, don't worry about following precedent or legal procedure, we'll teach you about those later. Oh and take your time making any decisions, no hurry here. Let's have fun." It likely won't matter since the courts seem to view Trump as divinely ordained and rules don't apply to him as they do to ordinary mortals. Wake me up, sure all of these horrors aren't really happening.
And then there are those "originalists," who are way up the ladder from a paltry district court judge in South Florida . . . The corruption goes deep, wide, and up to the top.
When I was a US Army captain in charge of nuclear weapons, I participated in sending an enlisted soldier to Leavenworth for mishandling top secret documents. Just one, not one hundred. When I outlined all of the evidence in the Florida case, expressing outrage about Cannon’s ruling, his response was, “sour grapes.” I have known this guy for 35 years. I may never speak with him again.
I was looking forward to your take on this ludicrous ruling Lucian, and you did not disappoint. She has no business on sitting on a Federal bench, or any court bench. Unfortunately, she is exactly what the MAGAts and the Federalist Society want.
What I find unsettling -- OK, borderline terrifying -- about the present mess is how the legal routes to sensible, peaceful solutions seem to be decreasing, mostly because of the diligent work the Republicans and their financial backers have been doing for many years, decades even. They've done yeoman's work corrupting the courts and, in many states, the electoral process. Too much of the electorate is woefully under-informed about how democracy works, or should work. Too many pundits are running around like headless chickens. Reliable sources of information are hard to find unless you already know where to look. And now look how much is hanging on this one upcoming election!
In her 93-pages of legal blather she also limited her decision to the matter-at-hand, which means it applies only to the *Rump case. Just like the SC in 2000 limited its decision to hand Bush Jr. the presidency, Bush v. Gore, to that matter making sure it couldn’t be used as precedent when a Democrat was appealing. She completely ignored all the prior decisions upholding the appointment process for special counsels by the AG without consent of the Senate as if they don’t exist. How convenient. If the 11th Circuit does overturn her, which it has to, that would be Strike Three for her, and she would be remanded to become a legal filing clerk somewhere in the circuit. But as you point our, Lucian, if her decision goes to SCOTUS the fix is in there, although it would require Roberts to figure out a weasel-word perversion of the English language to uphold her while not causing mayhem with decisions they don’t want overturned. But like Cannon, they conveniently ignore what’s inconvenient.
If Trump wins, you’re looking at the new Attorney General. If Trump loses, it will eventually go to the Supreme Court, which is not so supreme anymore, and she will win. In any event, the Special Counsel and the present Attorney General, should not waffle, refile now, and fast track, I think. No reason not to. Both side are already prepared. Time for the good guys to ask themselves what the bad guys would do if all were reversed and do that, plus some. Or, I fear, our high road will drive this country into a cliff.
That Florida congressman who's so fond of teenage girls said yesterday that Lucy belongs on SCOTUS. I say, when his hands aren't so full, Jack Smith for A.G.
I don't know when I've been more depressed at the political news and abyss we stare at than in this past week. It's affecting my moods, my sleep, and my anguish at any future plans (will there be any viable future to plan for once we're imprisoned in Trumpistan and ruled by a mad emperor who believes he's omnipotent)?
Has anyone ever gamed the legal system better than the creature Drumpf?
Interesting thing is Clarence Thomas wrote in the presidential immunity trial the fact that allowed Cannon the pathway to throw this case out. Seems Ginny Thomas has been talking this up for a month now. Wait a minute, Thomas said he never talks business with his wife so there was no need to recuse himself from this case. Hmmmm. Maybe this is why I can no longer call myself a Republican, I don’t lie because I’m too dumb to remember what I lied about……. Guess this disqualifies me from a career with the GOP!
Lucian, you’ve been a great help in my joining my wife in an MSM blackout. Too much pain, too little value. Like PaulaB, we’re focusing on grass roots.
For more than a week, now, I’ve turned off cable news. I only graze written headlines, Twitter recommendations, and Substack, and that’s it.
Yours is the column I never miss, and most often, it is enough! Finally renewed my decades-away Salon subscription from this article page. I cannot thank you enough!
I believe that if a bullet from an assault rifle had passed close enough to damage (or "pierce" lol) an ear, it would have been partially pulped and he would have at least staggered if not fallen. He would also almost definitely have required a brain scan and been monitiored at a medical facility overnight for observation, for any adverse effects from the pressure wave of said bullet. Plus he would likely have had one hell of a headache the next day. The big white medical pad is possibly there to hide the lack of damage.
How do I know this? For a while when working on a farm in New South Wales in Australia, due to boredom I would catch rabbits in the evening. They fed at dusk and, by firing a scoped .22 rifle while aiming between their ears about 1/2" above the skull, each shot would knock one out cold for around thirty seconds. I could consistently get two at a time then run in and put them in my bag before they regained consciousness, then move on to the next set of burrows (under piles of wood-fall).
I think that if he had been hit by a 223 round that the top of his ear would have been destroyed.
Grabbing at his ear may support that he was in fact targeted.
The question is where did that “round” land? There were people immediately behind him. I find it difficult to believe that it missed a group behind him.
Plus the round was shot from above. It would not have deflected upwards.
And as he so stupidly raised his head so the guy could take another shot =so he could get a meme out of it, the SS had to put hands over his head! Reminded me of his tearing off the mask on the balcony during Covid, looking just like Mussolini for all the world to see, worship and bow down!!
I wonder if he has ever seen the photos of the Mussolinis hanging upsidedown from the rafters of a gas station after they were shot trying to escape Italy and the allies?
If like me you feel a need to study the ear, and face immediately after the event, search 'image trump right ear' online. The injury, at the top of the ear, is unambiguous. Angry, but probably short-term effect. His slightly bloody face tells a different story.
LATER To illustrate her typically insightful new column, Nina Burleigh uses one of the handful that show djt's ear and right cheek clearly
To be honest, I'm really down about what is happening in our nation--and Cannon's latest move is simply the tip of the iceberg. What with The Bloated Yam's desire to upend the Constitution, the selection of JD Vance and his stance on all the social issues, Biden's decline in the polls, and the SCOTUS decision that gave The Bloated Yam special immunity, this has turned into the summer from Hell.
Ignore the polls.
Exactly! I've read they only call landlines - who has landlines? Old people. Who answers calls from numbers the don't recognize these days? Very few. Another point - women have not forgotten what happened two years ago. I still predict a massive blue tsunami!
Re (only) landlines: that's no longer true. Cellphone users are included now.
I don't answer unknown numbers on my cell phone, either. Only if it is a business phone is anyone required to. That's what voice mail is for--and it can be virtual either way, so you don't even have to bother to call in to check.
Me too.
How do they get the #s?
I didn't pay attention to details—just knowing that the flagrant flaw was fixed was enough. It's been a few years..
HEY! I’m OLD!! Watch it!
I am too though I have no idea how that happened 😉
LOL
Me too...LOL!
Take Heart! And Action:
Over 30,000 people (their max) joined Red Wine and Blue's video conference on saving our democracy with Dr. Heather Cox Richardson yesterday (including me)! Then participants split into smaller state groups to create action plans! YES!
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/JuzCU5SWs3eJWgkV/?mibextid=qi2Omg
I love HCR. However, the Republican plans to upend the election results have hit a nerve in my 83 year old body. I love Joe Biden but feel he probably should have dropped out after his debate fiasco where he clearly wasn't nimble both physically and mentally. Can he pull it out? I can only hope.
Here is Heather's talk today, really matter of fact and hopeful!
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/YGZt4R82M9Nbpyec/?mibextid=qi2Omg
Reports that he's getting unfounded information don't encourage hope. https://politicalwire.com/2024/07/15/biden-allies-worry-hes-not-getting-complete-information/
https://politicalwire.com/2024/07/16/biden-shrinks-his-inner-circle/
Red Wine and Blue reported 40,000 people! Yay for them and for HCR. People are interested and they’re listening.
YES!!!
Turns out 40,000 particpated in Red Wine & Blue with Dr. Heather Cox Richardson's Project 2025 discussions!!!
Thank you for the link!
You can do this!
Stay strong.
(Staying strong includes doing what's needed for oneself to endure. )
I appreciate your concern. I've managed to remain (relatively) upbeat until the past few days when I've found that my faith in Biden and the American people has certainly decreased.
I don't give any credance to the polls. If we don't wipe the RepubliCONs with their own toilet paper, someone with a better aim will get him...let's just get on with it.
Cannon gave Trump a “ happy ending”. She is in the wrong profession.
But, here is the issue. How long will it take Smith to appeal? How long will it take the 11th Circuit to rule? How long will Trump's team be allowed to drag their feet on an appeal to the Supreme Court/ How long will an out of session Court take to schedule and hear the case and render a decision?
The process is going to drag out well past the election IMHO. So, she has accomplished her goal and will still sit in her courtroom for other trials. Justice delayed is justice denied. The Score is Federalist lackey 1: The public interest 0.
There was already no hope the trial would be before the election. What is at stake here now is getting SOME confidence back in the judiciary--or not.
Should have gotten the boot a long time ago - always wondered if she got her law degree at Trump U
There seems to be something rotten in advanced legal education, as evidenced by the likes of Hawley and Cruz who got their degrees @ Harvard Law, not the sort of institution that used to advertise on matchbooks.
I don't think we can blame Harvard Law School (Hawley, Cruz) or Yale Law School (Vance). These places don't train people in idealogy or morality. They train people to be experts in understanding and exercising the law. The fact that a few people who go through that training are not only smart but also amoral and exercise the superb legal skills they gain at those schools to manipulate and pervert the law for ugly purposes is a stain on those individuals, not the schools. I'll bet there's a long list of liberal and progressive lawyers trained at Harvard and Yale who are working for the betterment of society and the protection of our democracy and our civil rights, and to save our future on this planet.
Having been through law school and practiced for years, I can attest that students DO get training in "zealous advocacy" of the client, which really is needed for our system to work. But it is way too easy to be overzealous in pursuit of "success."
And it is actually just a small part--trial practice, in your last year. Most of the time is spent learning to parse and distinguish case laws and statutes.
Those are both skills used for good or ill. Works for the clients, but is way too easy to apply to obfuscating the truth you actually know is true and, even when not dealing with clients, supporting whatever hypocrisy you want to. It is the moral character of the student, not the law school training, that determines what you do with the skills.
The part that way too many law students sleep through is legal ethics. When I took the bar, all of the questions were essay responses (basically, spot the issue and respond) EXCEPT legal ethics, which was multiple choice. This was a first. And the choices were DREADFULLY written. There were several where I knew the answer cold, and none of the choices stated it. I had to guess what the examiner must have had in mind.
I passed on lucky guesses. Something like 2/3 of the students who took that exam didn't. They had to RE-GIVE it for those who flunked.
This was back in 1982. I have no idea how the bar exam questions work now. But the whole experience hints at how the bar as a whole treats legal ethics. It is almost entirely "don't screw the client" without any real thought of "try to find the truth."
I was lucky to find a job that put me in the middle (surety--where the main thing was to look at two OTHER competing positions, and rarely have to "advocate" for my corporate client.)
Thanks for sharing your first-hand experience, Susan. I attended Yale undergrad, but knew some law students. Thank you for pointing out that while most?/all? law schools include a course on Legal Ethics, neither the schools nor the bar exam require the students to take it seriously. As the expression goes, with great power comes great responsibility. Apparently law schools teach students how to use the power tool of the law, but not nearly enough about how to wield that power ethically. Also, I suspect that even if they did strengthen their Legal Ethics requirements, you can add to someone's knowledge, but it's much harder to change their character.
Heh. When I went to college Yale didn’t admit women! Nor Harvard, nor Columbia. Thank god for Stanford.
Great post. Thanks. When "ethics" courses are offered in any discipline, e.g., medicine, they seem to be treated as add-ons, like "this isn't the real deal -- this is what you should know to get by."
The exception being my major, philosophy - where you can not only not fulfill the requirements without at least one ethics course, you would be hard pressed not to contend with the ethical theories of dozens of individual philosophere and philosophical movements as developed and critiqued over several thousand years!
Many of the students in my Professional Responsibility course were openly appalled by the weird arguments and assumptions of one fellow in the class, who seemingly could not fathom why conducting an affair with a client in a divorce case could possibly raise any serious ethical concerns. The professor, steady as always, patiently explained the issues via the usual Socratic method...Not sure what kind of a grade that guy ended up with, but his answers and questions to Professor Heidenreich certainly didn't help!
Now I'm wondering how that fellow has fared in his legal career -- assuming that he passed the bar . . . Wow.
We can blame the big schools for letting the Heritage Foundation to take up space there, though. They vet young law students out and bring them into their fold. This was an idea Leonard Leo had years ago and it worked. He and the other white people (mostly MEN) saw the writing on the wall in the 80’s but really after we elected Obama twice. They felt that the white race was threatened, so they came up with this diabolical plan to target immigrants, Jews, Muslims, Blacks, Mexicans (and other brown folks), and Asians. Stephen Miller is the perfect Svengali for this task.
Oh how I hate that unelected little punk! And that goes double for Steve Bannon!!
Google Joseph Goebbels. Miller is his doppelganger.
Right, where did Roy Cohn attend law school?
According to Wikipedia, Cohn went to Columbia for both undergrad and law school, supposedly graduating law school at age 20. I haven't checked the sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Cohn
She got her law degree at the University of Michigan, where I did a visit twice. I lived in Ann Arbor and taught at the lesser MSU. So far, I have held my tongue about her with UM profs. that I know. Still, I note that the predecessor school to MSU--Detroit College of Law--had Ivan Boesky as an alum, but he only did one year. No traitorous judges so far.
Mae, I'm curious. I spent 11 years (under-grad and grad) at The University of Hawaii Manoa. One of our buildings was Kuykendall Hall. It isn't a common surname so I'm wondering if you are a relation to OUR Kuykendall.
Not to my knowledge. Thanks for the note.
It's as though someone took a first year law student, plunked them down in a federal court, and said "do what you want, don't worry about following precedent or legal procedure, we'll teach you about those later. Oh and take your time making any decisions, no hurry here. Let's have fun." It likely won't matter since the courts seem to view Trump as divinely ordained and rules don't apply to him as they do to ordinary mortals. Wake me up, sure all of these horrors aren't really happening.
And then there are those "originalists," who are way up the ladder from a paltry district court judge in South Florida . . . The corruption goes deep, wide, and up to the top.
And, hey, it's Florida...'nuff said?
When I was a US Army captain in charge of nuclear weapons, I participated in sending an enlisted soldier to Leavenworth for mishandling top secret documents. Just one, not one hundred. When I outlined all of the evidence in the Florida case, expressing outrage about Cannon’s ruling, his response was, “sour grapes.” I have known this guy for 35 years. I may never speak with him again.
I was looking forward to your take on this ludicrous ruling Lucian, and you did not disappoint. She has no business on sitting on a Federal bench, or any court bench. Unfortunately, she is exactly what the MAGAts and the Federalist Society want.
What I find unsettling -- OK, borderline terrifying -- about the present mess is how the legal routes to sensible, peaceful solutions seem to be decreasing, mostly because of the diligent work the Republicans and their financial backers have been doing for many years, decades even. They've done yeoman's work corrupting the courts and, in many states, the electoral process. Too much of the electorate is woefully under-informed about how democracy works, or should work. Too many pundits are running around like headless chickens. Reliable sources of information are hard to find unless you already know where to look. And now look how much is hanging on this one upcoming election!
An election the Republican Trump Cult has already indicated it won't accept unless they win.
In her 93-pages of legal blather she also limited her decision to the matter-at-hand, which means it applies only to the *Rump case. Just like the SC in 2000 limited its decision to hand Bush Jr. the presidency, Bush v. Gore, to that matter making sure it couldn’t be used as precedent when a Democrat was appealing. She completely ignored all the prior decisions upholding the appointment process for special counsels by the AG without consent of the Senate as if they don’t exist. How convenient. If the 11th Circuit does overturn her, which it has to, that would be Strike Three for her, and she would be remanded to become a legal filing clerk somewhere in the circuit. But as you point our, Lucian, if her decision goes to SCOTUS the fix is in there, although it would require Roberts to figure out a weasel-word perversion of the English language to uphold her while not causing mayhem with decisions they don’t want overturned. But like Cannon, they conveniently ignore what’s inconvenient.
Cannon Dismisses Case Against Trump For Stealing National Security Documents: Follow the corruption trail with this interactive map
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/07/15/cannon-dismisses-case-against-trump-for-stealing-national-security-documents-follow-the-corruption-trail/
Deepak, thank you for the link to Democracy Labs! How did I miss them until now?
If Trump wins, you’re looking at the new Attorney General. If Trump loses, it will eventually go to the Supreme Court, which is not so supreme anymore, and she will win. In any event, the Special Counsel and the present Attorney General, should not waffle, refile now, and fast track, I think. No reason not to. Both side are already prepared. Time for the good guys to ask themselves what the bad guys would do if all were reversed and do that, plus some. Or, I fear, our high road will drive this country into a cliff.
That Florida congressman who's so fond of teenage girls said yesterday that Lucy belongs on SCOTUS. I say, when his hands aren't so full, Jack Smith for A.G.
Lol. Trump's nominations are vetted by the Federalist Society, and I seriously doubt they'd ever recommend Aileen Cannon.
Maybe so… But he would reward her somehow with some kind of job she totally does not deserve, as long as she continues to do his bidding.
Judgeless Ai-lean-twd-tRump gave little orange boy candy he craved.
It's Cotton-Candy-Law It Will Not Stand.
Unfortunately, with the current SCOTUS, it very well may stand..
I Concur Jan, Sir
And if so, we'll persevere nevertheless.
This case isn't the sole avenue for justice regarding that thug, tfg.
I don't know when I've been more depressed at the political news and abyss we stare at than in this past week. It's affecting my moods, my sleep, and my anguish at any future plans (will there be any viable future to plan for once we're imprisoned in Trumpistan and ruled by a mad emperor who believes he's omnipotent)?
Has anyone ever gamed the legal system better than the creature Drumpf?
If it's any comfort, you're not alone, Kozmo. Heed Gordon's replies to Kit Flynn's comment.
Interesting thing is Clarence Thomas wrote in the presidential immunity trial the fact that allowed Cannon the pathway to throw this case out. Seems Ginny Thomas has been talking this up for a month now. Wait a minute, Thomas said he never talks business with his wife so there was no need to recuse himself from this case. Hmmmm. Maybe this is why I can no longer call myself a Republican, I don’t lie because I’m too dumb to remember what I lied about……. Guess this disqualifies me from a career with the GOP!
Lucian, you’ve been a great help in my joining my wife in an MSM blackout. Too much pain, too little value. Like PaulaB, we’re focusing on grass roots.
For more than a week, now, I’ve turned off cable news. I only graze written headlines, Twitter recommendations, and Substack, and that’s it.
Yours is the column I never miss, and most often, it is enough! Finally renewed my decades-away Salon subscription from this article page. I cannot thank you enough!
Non Sequetor---Trump's right ear is intact, which means He was burnt by the friction of the air, as the bullet passed by.
I believe that if a bullet from an assault rifle had passed close enough to damage (or "pierce" lol) an ear, it would have been partially pulped and he would have at least staggered if not fallen. He would also almost definitely have required a brain scan and been monitiored at a medical facility overnight for observation, for any adverse effects from the pressure wave of said bullet. Plus he would likely have had one hell of a headache the next day. The big white medical pad is possibly there to hide the lack of damage.
How do I know this? For a while when working on a farm in New South Wales in Australia, due to boredom I would catch rabbits in the evening. They fed at dusk and, by firing a scoped .22 rifle while aiming between their ears about 1/2" above the skull, each shot would knock one out cold for around thirty seconds. I could consistently get two at a time then run in and put them in my bag before they regained consciousness, then move on to the next set of burrows (under piles of wood-fall).
Me? Was surprised some RN with a sense of humor stuck an Always mini-pad on his ear.
When an unusual nosebleed started a few years ago I poked a tampon up my nose. It worked. Happily, nobody saw the incident.
Repurposing is what sharp minds do in a flash
That's so exotic, Craig! Please, more where that came from.
I think that if he had been hit by a 223 round that the top of his ear would have been destroyed.
Grabbing at his ear may support that he was in fact targeted.
The question is where did that “round” land? There were people immediately behind him. I find it difficult to believe that it missed a group behind him.
Plus the round was shot from above. It would not have deflected upwards.
The ballistics don’t appear to add up.
One theory I saw was splintered glass or plastic deflected by a bullet. Not a bullet itself.
And as he so stupidly raised his head so the guy could take another shot =so he could get a meme out of it, the SS had to put hands over his head! Reminded me of his tearing off the mask on the balcony during Covid, looking just like Mussolini for all the world to see, worship and bow down!!
I wonder if he has ever seen the photos of the Mussolinis hanging upsidedown from the rafters of a gas station after they were shot trying to escape Italy and the allies?
Supposedly a piece of glass from the teleprompter that got hit cut his ear - of course he'll claimed he dodged a bullet...
"Supposedly" is right. The glass shard social media rumor was discredited almost immediately.
The glass shard makes sense because of the cuts on his face. He probably used a Hollywood blood bubble when he "touched his ear".
I was thinking of that fake blood bubble, too.
If like me you feel a need to study the ear, and face immediately after the event, search 'image trump right ear' online. The injury, at the top of the ear, is unambiguous. Angry, but probably short-term effect. His slightly bloody face tells a different story.
LATER To illustrate her typically insightful new column, Nina Burleigh uses one of the handful that show djt's ear and right cheek clearly
https://www.americanfreakshow.news/p/is-there-nothing-maga-wont-blame The bad news is that to emphasize the point of her essay, color has been sucked from the rest of the image, including djt's head. If you zoom in on it, it's still revealing.