Friday, March 25, 2022

Supreme Court?

Jonathan Turley:

With the completion of her two days of confirmation testimony, one fact is now clear: Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson insists that she has no judicial philosophy other than a judicial methodology that is essentially identical to her oath of office. Putting aside the legal and linguistic problems with that position, most of the media and legal experts have simply shrugged and moved on. That is curious because just a week ago, many of these same figures went ballistic when I noted that we have little evidence of a judicial philosophy in past decisions by Judge Jackson and it would be one of the key issues in her confirmation hearings.

Indeed, it was treated as racist to even note that Jackson’s record does not offer a clear judicial philosophy on the interpretation of the Constitution or statutes. Democratic senators like Sheldon Whitehouse have now recognized the “fact that Judge Jackson said ‘I do not have a judicial philosophy.’” (3:45) It is not clear if we can now take Jackson’s word on the subject.

CNN legal analyst and law professor Steve Vladeck was one of the commentators who objected to my column that the record is thin on Jackson’s judicial philosophy on interpreting the Constitution or statutes. (For the record, I have previously criticized Vladeck for false legal claims).

Vladeck declared that the claim that the record on a judicial philosophy is “bunk” and noted that she has hundreds of decisions. Notably, Vladeck only responds to my reference to a “comparably thin record” despite the fact that it was a reference made “in terms of her judicial philosophy.”

Vladeck suggested that I was saying that she had little experience. I not only raised the record solely in terms of her judicial philosophy but previously discussed in writing and on television Jackson’s experience on the court. 

Are you following the confirmation?  I am not.  I'm following it through Turley's commentaries.  Otherwise, not really at all.  I don't care all that much.  It's not as though the woman has demonstrated any great reason for me to cheer her on.

That's not an attack on her.  That's an attack on the Democratic Party today that will not go all out and back an actual left nominee.  So we get the center-right and then we whine in a few years about how the Court tilts right.  The Republcians aren't afraid to nominate a conservative.  It's a shame that Democrats won't demand Joe nominate a real leftist.  

I'm sure the nominee will be confirmed and I'm sure she'll be a middle of the road justice.  I'm also sure that we need real left justices on the Court.

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

 Thursday, March 24, 2022.  Moqtada al-Sadr wasnt his inexperienced relative to be prime minister of Iraq as Mad Maddie Albright slips away to that special place in hell that she spoke so often of.

We're live on the Blood Runway, awaiting the latest arrival.  Look, there he is, Mad Maddie!  She's sipping throug purgatory as she heads straight to hell.  Mad Maddie!  Mad Maddie!  Can you stop a moment to speak to us!!!

Madeleine Albright :Yes, what is it?

Is there anything you'd like to say to our viewing audience?

Madeleine Albright : Just that I've always believed that hate is eternal and if you spend your life focused on that, you can do a lot real damage and kill a lot of innocent people.  The only wasted life is a life dovted to love and peace.

Some people consider you a buthcer.

Madeleine Albright ::  A butcher?  No,  a utcher does much more honest work.  I'm an excutioner.  I am a destroyer.  I used my time on earth ensuring others wuffered and I'm really, really proud of that.  My only real regret is that I couldn't have killed more.

Mad Maddie could you speak up, some people in purgatory are starting to boo.

Madeleine Albright :  Yes, and I hear them.  All I can say is you hate me, you really, really hate me.  It makes all I did worth it to feel so much hate and repulsion.

What are you most grateful for?

Madeleine Albright : A lifetime of destrution.  Probably right after that would be the press..I've always insisted, ''Give me a whorish press and I can kill millions."  They whored for me while I killed Iraqi children.  They whored for me out of office.  Kisses to Katrina vanden Heuvel who ran Naomi Klein's GUARDIAN report on James Baker profiting off the Iraq War but refused to let THE NATION run the article about me profiting off the Iraq War.   Katty, you cheap whore, let's bump one last time when you join me in hell!  But seriously, even now the press whores for me, even in death.  They won't hold me accountable.  They'll talk about me being the first -- and theyll shortchange me.  "The First and The Worst!"  -- that's how I always billed myself.  Give me the credit I'm due!!!!  

Last question, Mad Maddie, what are you wearing?

Madeleine Albright ::  It's my 100% pure civilian coat, made from the skins of many of the actual children I condemned to death.  All murders matter but there's something especially soft and warm about knowing that your kill was a child, you know what I mean?  Now excuse me, I have to go. The Haliburton wing of Hell has a strict check-in policy and I don't want to lose my suite.  Tell Condi [Rice] to keep giving Hank [Kissinger] all the love that I did and, Dick [Cheney], I know you'll be joining me soon!

Madeleine Albright  has left the earth.  The whorish press is attempting to sweep up and conceal the mess she left behind.  Some will insist don't speak ill of the dead but did Mad Maddie follow that practice regarding the Iraqi children she killed?  


From Elaine's "Mad Maddie leaves this earth:"

Madeleine Albright died today. Do not worry about the former Secretary of State. As she long noted, there is a special place in hell . . . for people like her.

She infamously said there was a special place in hell for women who didn't help other women. Since she took pleasure in the deaths of so many Iraqi girls (and boys) you can be sure her destination is already booked and they have a room ready.

"We think it was wroth it." That's her infamous remark from 60 MINUTES when Lesley Stahl asked her about the crushing sanctions she oversaw as part of Bill Clinton's administration -- sanctions that led

Liz Sly (WASHINGTON POST) noted in 2017 that a more recent study had found that it wasn't 500,000 children who died.


But that was what the figure was thought to be when Mad Maddie was asked. And she said it was worth it.

She was a bloody thirsty War Hawk. Unlike the bulk of the deaths she caused, she lived to the age of 84. She profited off of the Iraq War. She was a merchant of death. I hope she will be very warm in her after-life. Very, very warm.

Margaret Kimberley Tweets:

Former secretary of state Madelyn Albright said killing 500,000 kids was "worth it." I watched the interview and thought she'd find a way not to answer, obfuscate, blame Saddam, or change the subject. Nope. She went all in. Killing kids was ok with her. Now she's dead. Oh well.

Ajamu Baraka Tweets:

Madeline Albright was a criminal like her boss Bill Clinton. If there was real justice in the world they both would have found themselves in the dock for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

In Iraq,  the political stalemate continues.  October 10th elections were held.  The country still waits on a president and prime minister all these months later.  ARB WEKKLY reports:

Partisan and personal loyalties have decided the fate of Iraq's presidency and premiership, despite all previous vows by populist leader Moqtada al-Sadr to base his nominations for leadership posts on the national interest only.

Instead, Iraq seems to be moving away from a system of political quotas to one based on the accommodation of various players, if not indeed, plain nepotism.

Sadr chose to nominate Riber Ahmed, the Kurdistan region’s interior minister and director of the office of party leader Massoud Barzani, for the position of president of the republic. He has also nominated Mohammad Jaafar al-Sadr, one of his cousins, to serve as the country’s prime minister.

Iraqi political analysts said that Sadr, who had claimed to be motivated by a desire to free himself from the yoke of the pro-Iranian Shia Coordination Framework, has fallen under the control of Massoud Barzani and accepted his conditions. These included endorsing the latter’s nominee for the presidency of Iraq, despite the fact that the candidate is virtually unknown to most Iraqis. Moreover, Ahmed will have a hard time filling the shoes of a figure of the stature, connections and overall record of the incumbent Barham Salih.

Analysts said that by agreeing to be swayed by the game of political accommodation and by choosing a relative with no political record nor experience as nominee for prime minister, Sadr has shown he is no different from the rest of the political players who have assumed leadership positions in the country since the 2003 US invasion.  His opposition to quotas, nepotism and his advocacy of the “national majority” now ring hollow, they add.

Three days before the appointment of a new president for Iraq, the tripartite alliance (the Sunni Sovereignty Alliance, the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Sadrists) announced the formation of the largest bloc in parliament under the banner of “Saving the Country”. The new alliance officially announced the nomination of Riber Ahmed for president and Mohammad Jaafar al-Sadr as prime minister.

The buffon the western press called a "kingmaker" is revealed as the fraud so many of us already knew he was.  In fact, the western press itself was smarter about Moqtada in 2004 than they are now (excepting Paddy Cockburn who was always an idiot when it came to Moqtada -- then and now).  

March 25th is when Parliament is set to meet next and they should be voting on the issue of president.  There are dozens of nominees.  After the president is voted on, the next step would be for the new president to name a prime minister-designate.  That person would then have 30 days to form a Cabinet.  It's supposed to be a full Cabinet.  No one's ever been held to that.   They should be.  It's the only measure you have to meet to move from prime minister designate to actual prime minister.  The point of the test is to demonstrate that you will be able to govern.  And the more empty Cainet spaces a designate has had, the harder it was for them to govern once they were prime minister.  So the test does serve a prupose.

We'll wind down with a few more Tweets regarding the thankfully dead Mad Maddie:

madeleine albright confronted by an ohio state university student in 1998 on why the US continues to bomb iraq while selling weapons to israel used on palestinians. her response is accusing the students in the room of defending saddam hussein

To you, that was a beloved child, your progeny, the fruit of your loins, the synthesis of you and your beloved spouse, the herald of a brighter future after decades of gloom -- to Madelyn Albright, it was a small price to pay to show Saddam a line in the sand.

The following sites updated:


Wednesday, March 23, 2022

Mad Maddie leaves this earth

Madeleine Albright died today. Do not worry about the former Secretary of State. As she long noted, there is a special place in hell . . . for people like her.

She infamously said there was a special place in hell for women who didn't help other women. Since she took pleasure in the deaths of so many Iraqi girls (and boys) you can be sure her destination is already booked and they have a room ready.

"We think it was wroth it." That's her infamous remark from 60 MINUTES when Lesley Stahl asked her about the crushing sanctions she oversaw as part of Bill Clinton's administration -- sanctions that led

Liz Sly (WASHINGTON POST) noted in 2017 that a more recent study had found that it wasn't 500,000 children who died.


But that was what the figure was thought to be when Mad Maddie was asked. And she said it was worth it.

She was a bloody thirsty War Hawk. Unlike the bulk of the deaths she caused, she lived to the age of 84. She profited off of the Iraq War. She was a merchant of death. I hope she will be very warm in her after-life. Very, very warm.


"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Wednesday, March 23, 2022.  The cerafully crafted narrative on Ukraine continues to unravel and a major report is released chornicling the persecution of the LFBTQ community in Iraq.

Every day, JUS President Joe Biden and the White House lose a little more control of the narrative regarding Ukraine.  Every day the action becomes less popular.  Every day, people realize how much they've been manipulated  I said "people," that doesn't include Amy Schumer.  After all, there's a reason we don't let her on the furniture.  

Dan Cohen (MPN) reports on how the whole effort has been sold to the public by numerous public relations firms:

Since the Russian offensive inside Ukraine commenced on February 24, the Ukrainian military has cultivated the image of a plucky little army standing up to the Russian Goliath. To bolster the perception of Ukrainian military mettle, Kiev has churned out a steady stream of sophisticated propaganda aimed at stirring public and official support from Western countries.

The campaign includes language guides, key messages, and hundreds of propaganda posters, some of which contain fascist imagery and even praise Neo-Nazi leaders.

Behind Ukraine’s public relations effort is an army of foreign political strategists, Washington DC lobbyists, and a network of intelligence-linked media outlets.

Ukraine’s propaganda strategy earned it praise from a NATO commander who told the Washington Post, “They are really excellent in stratcom — media, info ops, and also psy-ops.” The Post ultimately conceded that “Western officials say that while they cannot independently verify much of the information that Kyiv puts out about the evolving battlefield situation, including casualty figures for both sides, it nonetheless represents highly effective stratcom.”

Key to the propaganda effort is an international legion of public relations firms working directly with Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to wage information warfare.

According to the industry news site PRWeek, the initiative was launched by an anonymous figure who allegedly founded a Ukraine-based public relations firm.

“From the first hour of war, we decided to join the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to help them distribute the official sources to show the truth,” the nameless figure told PR Week. “This is a hybrid war: the mix of bloodily struggling fight with a huge disinformation and fake campaign lead by Russia [sic].”

According to the anonymous figure, more than 150 public relations firms have joined the propaganda blitz.

The international effort is spearheaded by public relations firm PR Network co-founder Nicky Regazzoni and Francis Ingham, a top public relations consultant with close ties to the UK’s government. Ingraham previously worked for Britain’s Conservative Party, sits on the UK Government Communication Service Strategy and Evaluation Council, is Chief Executive of the International Communications Consultancy Organisation, and leads the membership body for UK local government communicators, LG Comms.

Everyone sang from the same hymnal for a reason and it wasn't because they were citing facts.  It would be interesting to know how many celebrity 'influencers' were paid off to share tehir deeply, held and long standing beliefs that all developed about six weeks ago.

The man heading the neo-nazi government in Ukraine continues to step in it and track it all over their well laid plans.  Richard Medhurst reviews how his propaganda has gone off script.

The reality is getting out.  And that's why you see the Whoopi Goldbergs losing their s**t on air.  The narrative has collapsed.  And is collapsing.

The truth is out there and people are catching on.  Be cute if all the liars who delibertaely lied -- for money, to egg on war, whatever -- got held accountable.  They won't.  But we cand ream.

Binoy Kampmark (DISSIDENT VOICE) notes:

The Ukraine War is now making Russian citizens, at the behest of various quarters, undertake acts of purification in various foreign theatres.  They are being told to engage in crude demonstrations of loyalty (or, in some cases, disloyalty).  Admit you hate Putin, and you can attend a tournament to earn your crust.

UK Sports Minister Nigel Huddleston has taken a keen interest in this daft effort, hoping to encourage the organisers of Wimbledon, the All England Law Tennis Club (AELTC) to take a more severe approach to players from “pariah states” as long as they do not include such angelic wonders as Saudi Arabia.  Before a select parliamentary committee, Huddleston noted that, “Many countries have agreed that they will not allow representatives from Russia to compete.  There are also visa issues as well.  When it comes to individuals, that is more complex.”

Complexity and Huddleston do not get along.  “We need some potential assurance that they are not supporters of Putin and we are considering what requirements we may need to try to get some assurances along those lines.”

Tennis player Daniil Medvedev and his colleagues are facing the prospect that not engaging in public denouncement of the Kremlin will be insufficient to enable them to compete.  They are already not permitted to compete under the Russian flag, and they are being told that a Russian winning Wimbledon would be unpardonable for the glorious British tournament.  Their country has already been banned from competing in team events such as the Davis Cup and Billie Jean King tournaments.

And The Queen of Lard Amy Schumer is trying to get the Academy to put this on stage?  She doesn't nknow about art, she doesn't know about fitness, she doesn't know about comedy.  All of her commentar sare driving viewers away.  SHe needs to shut her mouth now.  She has not been given a post that tells her she can speak on behalf of the Acadmey.  She is entertaining at the Oscars as a co-host.  That is all.  Knowing her, she won't provide much entertainment. 

This was a huge mistake to make her a co-host and everything she's done in the last two weeks has made that obvious.  She is turning off potential viewers and that's not why she was hired.  She was hired.  Grasp that.  She's working there.  She's not nominated for anything.  Probably never will be.  But she thinks she can use this post -- mis-use it -- for her own personal politics?  No.  

Turning to Iraq,, a major report has been issued by Human Rights Watch  and IraQueer regarding the ongoing targeting of LGBTQs (and those thought to be) in Iraq.  The report is entitled "Everyone Wants Me Dead’: Killings, Abductions, Torture, and Sexual Violence Against LGBT People by Armed Groups in Iraq,"    Rasha Younes (Human /rights Watch) notes:

In February news circulated that a 23-year-old transgender woman, Doski Azad, had been killed by her brother in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. I read the news, having just concluded my research on armed groups’ killings, abductions, torture, and sexual violence against LGBT people in Iraq, and thought, how can LGBT people get justice and accountability when they can be killed and abused with impunity, even in their own homes?

Over the past six months, I interviewed 54 LGBT Iraqis who have survived harrowing violence at the hands of Iraqi armed groups and the police. Some of them also had intimate knowledge of other LGBT Iraqis who had been killed or disappeared by armed groups due to their gender presentation or perceived sexual orientation.

Our new report documents 8 abductions, 8 attempted murders, 4 extrajudicial killings, 27 instances of sexual violence, 45 threats to rape and kill, and 42 cases of online targeting by armed units within the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), groups nominally under the prime minister’s control since 2016, against LGBT people in Iraq. In eight cases, abuses by armed groups and police were against children as young as 15. In thirty-nine cases, the victims were able to identify the armed group behind the attack against them.

The numbers are most likely much higher. The attackers are known. Yet, as with so many killings and disappearances in Iraq, the perpetrators have not been held accountable.

Many of the people I interviewed were young enough to have just graduated from high school, yet the fear and isolation they described stretched as far as they could remember. Most had never spoken to anyone about what had happened to them. I found myself on several occasions setting aside my interview questions and just talking to them. I listened to a 27-year-old gay man describe how his boyfriend was tortured in front of him. “Then they shot him five times,” he said.

From the summary of the report:

The Iraqi government has failed to hold accountable members of various armed groups who in recent years have continued to abduct, rape, torture, and kill lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)people, with impunity. The cyclical nature of abuses against LGBT people, emanating from the family and stretching into every aspect of their public life, renders any “suspicion” of homosexuality or gender variance a cause for potential violence, which not only results in the death of LGBT people but makes their lives unlivable.

This report is focused on killings, abductions, torture, and sexual violence against LGBT people by armed groups in Iraq. It is based on 54 interviews with LGBT Iraqis who have survived violence and discrimination by state and non-state actors, based primarily on their gender expression and presumed sexual orientation.

Human Rights Watch, supported by the Iraqi LGBT rights organization IraQueer, documented eight cases of abductions, eight cases of attempted murder, four extrajudicial killings, twenty-seven cases of sexual violence—including gang rape—forty-five cases of threats to rape and kill, and forty-two cases of online targeting by individuals who identified themselves as members of armed groups against LGBT people in Iraq. In eight cases, abuses by armed groups and state actors, including arbitrary arrest and sexual violence, were against children as young as 15. In thirty-nine cases, individuals were able to identify the armed group behind the attack against them.

The public nature of the abuses documented, mostly occurring in broad daylight in the streets, coupled with their chilling intentionality, signal the climate of impunity afforded to perpetrators. The arbitrary nature of the attacks demonstrates that individuals are targeted as part of a larger scheme to intimidate those who do not adhere to normativity and to punish aberration. The Iraqi state’s failure to tackle the discriminatory social norms that underpin violence against LGBT people, as well as its reinforcement of these standards by way of promoting an anti-LGBT discourse through ‘morality’-based policies, contribute to fueling violence against individuals perceived as non-normative.

The abuses documented in this report, including enforced disappearances, arbitrary detention, torture, and killings, are not unique to LGBT people. Other ordinary Iraqis also face these forms of violence. But in the case of LGBT people, the violence emanates from and is exacerbated by their gender expression or perceived sexual orientation.

LGBT people across Iraq face routine violence from security officials, who verbally abuse and sexually assault them, arbitrarily arrest them, and detain them. Security forces also physically, verbally, and sexually harass people at checkpoints whom they perceive to be LGBT. 

LGBT people can be arrested under a range of vague provisions of the penal code aimed at policing morals and public indecency and limiting free expression. Human Rights Watch documented 15 cases of arrest by security forces of 13 LGBT people in Iraq. In June 2021, police in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) issued arrest warrants based on article 401 of the penal code which criminalizes “public indecency” against 11 LGBT rights activists who are either current or former employees at Rasan Organization, a Sulaymaniyah-based human rights group. As of March 2022, the case remained open pending investigation, though authorities had not detained the activists.

Most of the arrests of LGBT people documented in this report had no legal basis, even under Iraqi law Individuals stopped at checkpoints and subsequently arrested were rarely charged or convicted in accordance with the law. LGBT people arrested reported being forced to sign pledges stating that they had not been subjected to abuse and being denied access to a lawyer. The conditions of their detention included being denied food and water, the right to access family and legal representation or obtain medical services, as well as being sexually assaulted and physically abused. One 18-year-old gay man said he was subjected to a forced anal exam when he was 17 years old. Another 18-year-old gay man said officers attempted the same when he was 17. 

Twenty-seven of the fifty-four LGBT people Human Rights Watch and IraQueer interviewed said they had experienced sexual abuse and violence by armed groups, including unwanted touching, rape, gang rape, genital mutilation, and forced anal examinations.

Human Rights Watch also documented cases of digital targeting and online harassment on social media and same-sex dating applications by armed groups against LGBT people. As evident from the accounts of those interviewed by Human Rights Watch and IraQueer, the offline consequences of digital targeting are long-lasting. Individuals targeted reported being forced to change their residence, delete all social media accounts, change their phone numbers, and in some cases flee the country for fear of being monitored, blackmailed, and entrapped by armed groups.

The accounts documented detail a cycle of abuse, including a pattern of attempting to hunt LGBT people down to perpetrate harm against them, amounting to structural violence against them. The combination of hypervulnerability, loosely defined “morality” clauses, and the absence of domestic violence and anti-discrimination legislation and reliable complaint systems, are formidable barriers that impede LGBT people’s ability and willingness to report abuses they suffer to the police, or file complaints against law enforcement agents, creating an environment in which police and armed groups can abuse them with impunity.

Forty out of the fifty-four LGBT people whom Human Rights Watch and IraQueer interviewed reported experiencing extreme violence at least once by family members, almost always by male relatives, for their sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. Such violence included being locked in a room for extended periods; being denied food and water; being burnt, beaten, raped, electrocuted, attacked at gunpoint, subjected to conversion practices, and forced hormone therapy; being subjected to forced marriages; and being forced to work for long hours without compensation. Unlike the KRI, Iraq has no domestic violence legislation, instead its penal code allows for violence against women and children.

Each of the LGBT people whom Human Rights Watch and IraQueer interviewed reported experiencing harassment in the streets, ranging from verbal abuse to being attacked at gun point. Lack of access to protective mechanisms limits LGBT people’s mobility to a debilitating extent and deters them from seeking redress for abuses committed against them. Children facing violence from family members or others may be completely isolated, with nowhere to turn for safety.

As a result, many LGBT people said they felt they were forced to hide who they are to stay alive. Those who could not or did not wish to conceal their identities described a form of self-imposed house arrest, by which they refrained from leaving their homes at all, due to fear of harassment and the possibility of being stopped at checkpoints or targeted by armed groups. Sixteen LGBT people interviewed by Human Rights Watch and IraQueer said they attempted suicide at least once.

All 54 LGBT people interviewed for this report said that they would not report a crime committed against them to the authorities, either because of previous failed attempts where the complaint was dismissed or no action was taken, or because they felt that the blame will be redirected at them due to their non-conforming sexual orientations, gender identities, and expressions.

The Iraqi government is responsible for protecting Iraqis’ right to life. Iraqi authorities should investigate all reports of armed group or other violence against people targeted due to their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity and expression, prosecute, fairly try, and appropriately punish those found responsible, and publicly and expressly condemn all such violence. The government should take all appropriate measures to end torture, disappearances, summary killings, and other abuses based on sexual orientation and gender expression and identity, and compensate the families of all victims of unlawful killings and survivors of serious abuse.

Iraqi security forces should stop harassing and arresting LGBT people on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender expression and instead ensure their protection from violence. Iraq should introduce and implement legislation protecting against discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Human Rights Watch and IraQueer also call on states providing military, security, and intelligence assistance to Iraq, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France, to urge Iraqi authorities to investigate allegations of abuses by armed groups and the role of their own assistance in these alleged violations. These states should suspend military, security, and intelligence assistance to units involved in these violations and explain any suspension or end to military assistance publicly. These states should continue to suspend assistance until the government adopts measures to end these serious human rights violations.

This is ongoing.  And that's why we call it out and that's why we call idiots on our side (the left) who try to glorify a terrorist who targets LGBTQs in Iraq.  Let CODESTINK go down that road all by their lonesome.  I'm not joing them to walk among the homophobes and mourn their passing.  People like the 'poet' and general they publicly mourned over and over have terrorized the LGBTQ community and we won't mourn trash like that.  We'll side with the people, with the LGBTQ.  Not their attackers.

The following sites updated:

Diana Ross, Jonathan Turley on confirmations, Ava and C.I. on bad documentaries

Betty and C.I. both love Diana Ross' "I Still Believe" so I checked it out and I love it too.

I like it on the album (THANK YOU) but I think I like the remix better.  Make a point to listen to it.

Monday night, Cedric, Ann, Wally and Betty di a joint-humor post noting the song.

  • Betty explains that in "Diana Ross the legend and the pioneer."  It's really a great song.  

    Now here's Jonathan Turley on confirmation processes for Supreme Court nominees:

    “In passing on this nomination to the Supreme Court, we must also pass judgment on whether or not your particular philosophy is an appropriate one at this time in our history.” Those words in 1987 were a game changer in American confirmations when Democratic senators opposed the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Robert Bork by President Ronald Reagan. While the Senate had long maintained that a qualified nominee would be confirmed despite his judicial philosophy, that changed with Bork. The man who uttered those words was the senator from Delaware: Joe Biden.

    Biden has now made his first nomination as President. Democrats insisted, in the words of Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.),  Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson‘s confirmation must be “beyond politics.”

    That has not been the position of the Democrats since Bork and certainly not in the last three nominations. Indeed, many Democrats went public with the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett that they would vote against her entirely on her conservative approach to constitutional and statutory interpretation.

    The question is whether these hearings will clearly establish the judicial philosophy of Jackson.

    In her opening statement, Jackson discussed her past decisions and stressed “I believe in transparency. That people should know precisely what I think and the basis for my decision.” GOP senators will demand the same transparency from her during the question and answer sessions.

    While other nominees have been relative unknowns on their judicial philosophies, Jackson has an interesting added element. In her recent appellate court confirmation process, Jackson expressly refused to discuss her judicial philosophy.

    Also i want to again note from Ava and C.I.'s "TV: 'No one was looking after me!' (that includes you yourself)" about HBO MAX's Evan Rachel Wood series PHOENIX RISING:

    All Evan wants now, she maintains, is "to tell my truth."

    Well we've watched two episodes of PHOENIX RISING and we're still waiting for her to start doing that.


    It's really pathetic and so is Evan who seems to think she's a princess and unique and someone that the world has to rush to rescue.  Though she didn't cry "Rape" or even "No" during the filming of the video, it was -- in her mind -- the job of the crew to come between a couple -- a real life couple -- as they were making out on camera.  Time and again, she reveals just how pathetic she is.  Such as when she relates being on tour with him early in the relationship and his having throat problems so a doctor has prescribed liquid vicodin.  He's flying high on drugs at this point.  She explains 


    And after the show, we were on the bus and he didn't even know where he was.  I started getting really scared because he started getting violent and throwing things and I just thought now is when the handlers step in and defuse the situation and no one did. We showed up at the hotel, the bus parked and Manson just grabbed me by my arm and yanked me and, in front of everybody, he's dragging me by my arm into the hotel and, uh, no one's doing anything.  And he goes in and he immediately starts wrecking the room and smashing things and yelling.  And I looked back at the crew member like "You're not just going to leave me here?" You know, "You got to help me.''  And I remember him starting to slowly close the door and me going, "No, no, no, you can't leave me here."  And this guy I thought was my friend.  We had been on tour for a couple of months.

    How damn pathetic.  Grow the f**k up.  No crew members owes you anything and "we" were not on tour.  Marilyn Manson, the rock group, was on tour and that's who pays the crew.  Evan thinks because she's a celebrity -- one few have ever seen a performance of -- that she's owed this and she's owed that.

    You don't want to go with him, after you get off the bus, walk off. Need a moment to think so you walk into the hotel with him?  Okay, once you get into the lobby, run for the counter and tell the staff you need them to get a cab for you now.  Do any number of things but do not walk with him into the hotel, into the lobby, and accompany him to his room and then blame someone else for your being left in the room with him -- for your being left in a hotel room with your lover that you've decided to follow around the country as he works in one city after the next.

    Take some damn responsibility.


    And while you're at it, don't just take responsibility for the past, take it for this awful series you're a part of right now.  Take responsibility for animation in the series that sexualizes a young girl.  How does that belong in a series about assault?  How does putting an animated 12-year-old girl in a skirt so short it barely covers her ass fit into a series about assault?

    It's all so pathetic and all so dishonest.

    Evan Rachel Wood, if everything she says Brian did wrong to her was done to her, is a victim of many things and many people: Brian, her mother, society and, yes, even herself.  Letting young viewers know now that they can make some dumb decisions and end up with the wrong person would be helpful.  Letting them know to get the hell out when warning bells go off would be helpful.

    Being stupid enough at 34 to whine that, while you did not cry rape or stop him, it was a crew's job to stop whatever you and Brian were doing on camera ("essentially raped," her words) or that it was a crew member's job to keep you from the hotel room of your then-lover?  That's not taking accountability.  Evan ended up where she did due to many factors and until she's willing to talk about her own role in it, she's not helping anyone.

    In the future,  maybe HBO MAX can grasp that putting one person on camera does not make a documentary nor does surrounding her with her supporters on camera.  A documentary is not a LIFETIME ORIGINAL PORTRAIT, sorry if that's confusing.


    "Iraq snapshot:" (THE COMMON ILLS):

    Tuesday, March 22, 2022.  Again, we look at the lies about the IRaq War -- and how Barack Obama has never been held accountable. Plus I've added a response regfarding some e-mails about the upcoming Oscars.

    As we did yesterday, we'll again be noting Saif Ansari's bad piece at JACOBIN.  His piece is the perfect example of how and why the Iraq War cotninues.  Lies, selct truths, favoritism, omissions, all passed off as 'nothing but the truth.'

    An e-mail Martha passed on to the public account yesterday included this:

    So  President Obama wasn't sure how he would have voted if he had been in Congess when the Iraq War took place, so what?  He  was anti-war and wanted to end the war before it started and after he it started.  He never waivered and he did end the war.

    Saif, is that you?

    There's so much wrong with the stupidity in the quoted statements above.

    First, yesterday's snapshot ended when it did because I was done dictating having gotten off the treadmill and having done my cool down so I was headed to the shower.    On my end, there was the belief that this private conversation in a public sphere would not be confusing because we should all know what happened after he became president but apparently we're too invested in lying there as well.  

    Before we get to Barack as president -- and this is not a biography and will not cover every point -- let's drop back to before that.

    Some idiots supported Barack because he was 'anti-war.'  He was not.

    Elaine covered this at her site, I covered it here.  But for those late to the party, by several years, who want to pretend like they arrived on time . . .

    I have always maintained I understood how someone could be taken in by Barack even if they were pro-peace.  And I've explained how I was taken in.

    Anyone who considered thmselves a friend of Barack's in Chicago back in the day, Elaine or I knew.  Most of them, we both knew.  The more radical they were politically, the more likely we knew them.  (Note, they've all been discarded by Barack and that happened once he became president.)  So we knew of Barack.  Equally true, I've knwon Bobby Rush for decades.  So  I also knew that Barack wasn't who he pretended to be.

    Fine, I don't care, I just wanted politicians who would end the war.  He was going national.  He was going to run for the US Senate.  And because Elaine and I had money to donate, we were invited to one of his earliest fund raisers.  

    We chit and chatted and nodded with others present -- we knew over 2/3s of the room, and waited until we got our face time with Barack.  Elaine immediately spoke of how illegal the war was and how we shouldn't have gone into Iraq.  And she notes how the US troops need to come home.  And 'anti-war' Barack?  He informs us that US troops are on the ground now so it no longer matters.  Huh?

    He tries to move along the conversation with the fake ass charm that too many have fallen for but I stop him with a nicer equivlaent of "Bitch, what did you just say?"  And he's quite clear that he's not for ending the war, it's started.  

    We had assumed we'd be writign checks ofr the maximum amount -- that our initial donation would be it for the primary race he'd be fighting (and, as it turned out, fighting dirty -- no one ever wants to note how Barack used sealed court records to destroy an opponent in the primary and again in the general).  We went from, "Let's get him in the Senate!" to "get the f**k away from us."  We left.

    But prior to that moment of face to face time, it had been exciting.  He was against the war, He was bi-racial and a fresh start ("fresh start" was especially popular among his Chicago friends that and "a new page").  We were taken in by the narrative.  We knew better or should have, but we got taken in and that's how we ended up in Chicago.  

    But unlike a lot of idiots, when he showed us his true nature, that was it.  We didnt' support him.  We didnt' defend him. 

    Far too many people claimed he would end the war and that we had to vote for him.  Even now they lie.

    Barack didn't end the war.  And while he promoted the lie that he wanted to in his 2007 and 2008 speeches, he didn't plan on it.  Samantha Power -- despite John Nichols whoring for her -- did not leave Barack's campaign because she called Hillary Clinton a "monster."  She'd already survived that and it didn't really matter.  BArack was on camera flipping Hillary off.   He was making sexist remarks about her constatntly and that didn't matter.  he was putting 'converted gays' onstage, excuse me, ex-gays.  That's who he was on the campaign trail and people lied for him and looked the other way for him.  Self-laothing lesbian Laura Falnders  gave him a pass on that.  Remember her mantra, we will hold him accountable, just not now!  COuldn't do it in the primary, she said.  Had to line up behind him.  But in the general election, we'd hold him accountable and make our demands.  Then she never did that but insisted when he was in the White House . . . But she never did.  She didn't defend immigrants when he beacme the deporter-in-chief, she defend We The People when his two terms saw that massive transfer of wealth from the people to the already rich.  She never did anything. 

    At any rate, people should have woken up.  Yes, their so-called 'leaders' failed them.  Medea Benjmain, et al.  Though Barack was voting for every war funding item, CODESTINK didn't bird dog him.  CODESTINK did find a face of color to hide behind when they wanted to go after Hillary for being White.  It was a rare moment when a CODESTINKER found the time to share a byline with an actual woman of color.  

    The whores lied to get him in the White House and then they continued to lie.

    Just looking aback on it, it's appalling what they got away with.  Hadn't planned to go into this but let's note that Barack was friends with someone who was once on the most wanted list -- the FBI most wanted list.  

    So the press lied for him and FAIR hissed in the most idiotic way possible and tried to insist that Barack was treated unfairly in a debte because he was asked about it.

    The Weather Underground was a desiginated terrorist outlet.  Do you believe that they were terrorists?  Doesn't really matter.  When someone's running for president -- especially while touting their supposed superior judgment, things like that do matter.

    People have a right to ask.  And Barack should have been, if he were truly left, able to talk about how a corrupt system went after the Weather Underground (the FBI did not need to steal a woman's panties for their investigation -- sickos).

    In fact, a year before Barack began his run for the nomination, THE NATION had rolled out another attck on Weather Underground.  We defended the group at THIRD.  Toad Gitlin -- thankfully now dead -- was forever attacking the Weather Underground.

    We saw them as a response to the times they were created in.

    We also saw the sexism at play as everyone went on and on about Bill Ayers.  I love Bernardine Dohrn to this day.  I think she is a fascinating person.  I still speak to her.  I've never had any use for Bill.  No one with any brains ever has.  Bill was the arm candy, he was the trophy wife.  Benardine was the leader.  She didn't write a passive aggressive memoir -- one the media avoided in terms of what it said about them and how it explained some of them were in on what was taking place.

    Bernardine would never write such a friviolous book.  She was and remains a revolutionary.  And I respect her.   She led the Weather Underground.  But, in 2008, the press couldn't grasp she was the power in the couple and focused constnatly on Bill. and they went with the lie Barack and his campaign told, their kids were in school together.  That's how they knew each other.  


    The Obama girls were not born in the 70s.  But the press -- including THE GUARDIAN -- ran with that lie.  Chease Boudin is 41 years old -- Bernadine and Bill raised him.  Barack's oldest daughter is now 24.  They did not go to school together.  And heaven ehlp us all if the two had lseep overs back in tn 2008.

    It was one lie after another.  And people gobbled it up over and over.  Because they chose to.  At some point, when all the evidence is before you and you make the decision not to recognize it, you are choosing to be fooled.

    Samana Power was not fired for calling Hillary a "monster."  That moment had passed.  It was what was coming.  And we wrote about it the Friday it started coming out.  And continued to write about it the next week.  By contrast, after it came out, the day after, John Nichols ignored it and wrote a lie-filled column in which he even lied that Hillary and Samantha were friends.  They were not.  He was using the "monster" flap to distract from reality.

    Reality was that Samantha had opened her big mouth to the BBC.  Barack was claiming to be anti-war and saying he would pull US troops out of Iraq and would do so quickly.  He gave a timeline.  And the chief diplomatic expert in his campaign? She told the BBC that this promise wasn't a promise.  They you had to say things to get elected but you weren't bound by them when elected.  When Barack was elected, Samantha insisted, he would asses the situation in Iraq and then decide what he would do.

    All the whores played dumb.

    Many months later, the forever useless Tom Hayden -- oh, if only he'd lived long enough fo# #METOO -- emerged months later in July finally agnry -- momentarily -- about Barack and took THE HUFFING POST to huff about this March incident -- in July, he huffed.  And pretend no one had known about it.  And blame Hillary Clinton for that.  SHe should have informed the world.  Well, Tom, she did raise the issue.  Her campaing rasied it repeatedly for over a week.  Back in March of 2008, when it mattered.  It was whores like yourself who stayed silent.  Tom knew about it in real time.  I have the e-mails form him where he was whining to me about my covering it here in real time and how I was hurting "the case."

    Funny, he said that to me back in the 80s as well -- that I wa shurting "the cause."  HOw so?  By refusing his advances and making it clear that I would never, ever sleep with him.

    Barack gave a very informative interview while he was running.  It was to THE NEW YORK TIMES.  War cheerleder Michael Gordon wrote it up.  Most ignored the write up.  It wasn't much to read.  The transcript of the interview, however, was wroth reading and the paper published that online.  It was covered in this "Iraq snapshot," and, at THIRD, we used the transcript to write what THE TIMES should have written "NYT: Barack Obama Will Keep Troops In Iraq."  Read it, in his own words, read him saying that even if he pulls troops out, he's open to putting them back in.

    He never ended the war.

    All US troops did not leave.    We covered the Senate hearing where the late Senator Kay Hagan made that point in real time.  The press was there in full force but, strangely, they didn't cover the truth about what their little pet was actually doing.  Ted Koppel did.  On NPR and on NBC, he covered what was actually happening during the drawdown passed off as a withcrawl, he covered how many would be remaining, he had confirmation on camera from the military for the NBC report.  

    STrange, isn't it.  This was his post-NIGHTLINE beginning.  And it ended with those stories.  First the NBC outlet was pulled fromt he airwaves, then the long-running NPR program hit the dust.

    And we never really got reporting from Ted again.

    But we covered those reports here at lenght.  The NBC one?  We covered it before it aired.  REpeatedly.  Then we covered it after it aired.  And then we covered it for years aftwards.

    Barack did not oversee a withdrawal.  He oversaw a drawdown -- a reduction.  That's not what he promised on the campaign trail but the press was happy to join him in lying about it.

    In 2012, the idiot Mitt Romney was told that he needed to point this out.  He was told that he needed to go for this because Barack was running with the lie that he'd kept his promises -- except of course for closing Guantamano Bay.  He had withdrawn US forces from Iraq!!!!

    Mitt was told by his chief advisor that this was where Barack was weak and this was what he needed to hit on.

    But he didn't.  Because he's trash and he always was trash.

    This paragraph used to appear here a lot:

    December 6, 2012, the Memorandum of Understanding For Defense Cooperation Between the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Iraq and the Department Defense of the United States of America was signed.  We covered it in the December 10th and December 11th snapshots -- lots of luck finding coverage elsewhere including in media outlets -- apparently there was some unstated agreement that everyone would look the other way.  It was similar to the silence that greeted Tim Arango's September 25th New York Times report which noted, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions.  At the request of the Iraqi government, according to [US] General [Robert L.] Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence."

    September 25 of 2012.  The election year.  That's when Tim was able to get the truth into the paper of no record.  Jill Abrramson was still the eidtor of the paper and she was insisting that no truth be in the paper about Barack, he had to be re-elected.  Tim snuck that into a report on Syria.  It ran buried in the middle of that piece.  It should have been front page news but Jill repeatedly nixed it.

    A year after the wisthrawal that wasn't, Barack was sending US troops back into Iraq.  (Where they joined other US troops becuase all troops did not leave.)

    That's the reality regarding Barack.

    And if you stil l think he ended the (ongoing) war, that's on you for believing it now.

    JACOBIN whores for him all this time later.  Apparently, Laura Flanders, it's still not the time to hold Barack Obama accountable.

    And that's how we ended up with the 19th anniversary of the ongoing IRaq War.


    Added at 1:48 pm EST 3/22/22:

    Shirley reports a number of e-mails to the public e-mail account insist that I wrote the above to avoid weighing in on Amy Schumer.  Sorry, you're wrong.

    I didn't have Amy on the mind at all.  U dud bute nt tibgye ib /ant ub tge oast,  She was maing a complete ass out of herself for over a year.  But I said nothing because a firend had made a film with her and I wanted the film to do well (Goldie Hawn is the friend)>  So Ignored her and didn't call her out for being a poor sport and getting NETFLIX to cahnge their ratings.

    Sorry, Amy, no one likes you anymore.  You were briefly a film star.  And then you had to open that mouth of yours.  You don't know anything and should frankly just sit down and close your mouth.

    You are no longer a film star.  You're even questionable as a film actress.  That's because you have alienated so many people with your views that they never needed to know about.

    You are a joke in the industry and that's why HULU is your last shot after the film career died, after the reality nonsense flopped.  

    ABC has gotten the Academy to elimat handing out some awards live because they think the problem is the long hours the broadcast runs.  No.  Ratings are down for the Oscars because of all the partisan nonsenset that's passed off as politics.

    Her statements abouit 'going there' do not help the ratings. The first commercial featuring the three hosts was an embarrassment.  Amy had all the lines and all the action.  While Regina Hall -- an award winning actress -- and Wanda SYkes -- a comedian and actress of many years -- had to watch White failure act the fool.  Are they co-hosts or her sidkicks?

    Now Amy has said that the president of Ukraine should appear.


    Are you working for your cousin Chuck Schumer?  Amy, you're not working for the Academy.  As a member of the Academy, you are not working on my behalf.

    You are trying to bring your partisan nonsense into a celebration of the arts.

    The fact that we are not celebrating the arts in the broadcast is what has hurt rating.  

    Among other things, the man you want to bring to the Academy Awards night of honor is shutting down leftist outlets in Ukraine.

    Forget everything else, Amy, that alone says no.  Equally true, you may love him but he's not Nelson Mandela.  Take your crush somewhere else.  It does not belong on stage.

    But more to the point, there was never a reason to say "Yes."

    The Oscars are about art.  And you clearly are not qualified to co-hsot because you don't grasp that.

    We need to celebrate the arts.  We do not need your current cause or your current nonsense.

    That's Diana Ross with her latest mix of "I Still Believe" from her latest album THANK YOU.

    Why am I noting that?  Diana's a frined.  It's a great song.  I love THANK YOU>  That is all true.

    But there's another reason and goes to the failures of ABC and Amy.  

    It's great that Regina and Wanda are co-hsoting -- even if the commercials keep focusing on White Amy.  This is big step.

    It is not, however, the first and we need to celebrate the people who got us here.  Diana Ross is the first woman of color to ever be a co-host of the Oscars.  That should be pushed by aBC, that should be discussed and addressed.  This is historic.  I'm sure REgina will bring a full appreciaton of the arts in her duties as co-host.  I look forward to Wanda cracking me up.

    They got here because pioneers like Diana broke down the barriers.  We should ignore White Amy and her patisan nonsense and celebrate Regina and Wanda while acknowledging all the men and women who came bfore and brougtht us to this point.


    The following sites updated: