Is The Boston Marathon Bomber Ruling Good News For Roger Stone?

download-5We have been discussing the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in tossing the death sentence of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev due to juror bias (as well as reversing some convictions). The ruling is a relatively rare case of a court taking such action.  Criminal defense attorneys, including myself, have long complained that judges talk a good game about fair trials but always seem to find a way of avoiding new trials in the face of even clear juror bias. That was my objection to the Stone trial where Judge Amy Berman Jackson refused to grant a new trial on grounds very similar to those of Tsarnaev, including alleged bias in forepersons in the both cases. While Tsarnaev only got a new sentencing proceeding, Stone should receive an entirely new trial.

With his recent racist remark to a Black radio host, Stone continues to struggle to make himself even less popular than Tsarnaev. I have long been a critic of Stone who admits to being little more than a performance artist and provocateur.  However, he still deserves a fair trial and he did not get one from Judge Jackson.

The similarities between the cases are striking. At issue was the bias of Juror 1261. That is lawyer Tomeka Hart who served as the foreperson on the jury.  Hart is a Democratic activist and critic of the Trump administration. She was the Memphis City Schools board president. Hart has been vocal in public on her views of Trump and his associates. She referred to the President with a hashtag of “klanpresident” and spoke out against “Trump and the white supremacist racists.” She posted about how she and others protested outside a Trump hotel and shouted, “Shame, shame, shame!” When profanities were projected on the Trump hotel, she exclaimed on Jan. 13, 2018, “Gotta love it.” On March 24, 2019, she shared a Facebook post — no longer public — while calling attention to “the numerous indictments, guilty pleas, and convictions of people in 45’s inner-circle.” She also made direct references to Stone, including a retweeted post, in January 2019, from Bakari Sellers, again raising racist associations and stating that “Roger Stone has y’all talking about reviewing use of force guidelines.” She also described Trump supporters such as Stone as racists and Putin cronies.

These statements were not disclosed to counsel or the Court despite various questions that should have prompted such disclosures.  Nevertheless, Jackson refused a new trial, making a mockery out the entire voir dire process.  It turns out that you must disclose such bias so you can be barred from service. But if you don’t, it really does not matter.

It did matter in Boston.

In the 224-page opinion for the appellate panel, Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson noted that George A. O’Toole Jr. denied a request to move the trial out of Boston due to the obvious risk of juror bias but then failed to take necessary takes to protect against such bias. The result were jurors who made comments on social media that raise serious questions over their willingness to be impartial.

Notably, in a striking analogy to the Stone case, this included 22 Twitter posts and retweets by the jury’s forewoman. One referred to Mr. Tsarnaev as “that piece of garbage” but was never disclosed during juror selection.

She was not alone. Another juror went on Twitter on the day of the sentencing to say that Mr. Tsarnaev was “scum” and “trash” and that he belonged in a “dungeon where he will be forgotten about until his time comes.”

Notably, O’Toole struck a juror who was a criminal defense attorney because he  was not “open to the possibility of the death penalty.”  O’Toole based that judgment on his “sense of him” from his answers. However, he failed to explore such bias adequately in other jurors particularly in social media postings.  The First Circuit reaffirmed that “decisions about prospective jurors’ impartiality are for the judge, not for the potential jurors themselves.”

“To repeat what we wrote earlier, the judge qualified jurors who had already formed an opinion that Dzhokhar was guilty — and he did so in large part – 65 – because they answered “yes” to the question whether they could decide this high-profile case based on the evidence. The defense warned the judge that asking only general questions like that would wrongly “make[]” the potential jurors “judge[s] of their own impartiality” — the exact error that the Patriarca line of cases seeks to prevent. But the judge dismissed the defense’s objection, saying that “[t]o a large extent” jurors must perform that function. Yet by not having the jurors identify what it was they already thought they knew about the case, the judge made it too difficult for himself and the parties to determine both the nature of any taint (e.g., whether the juror knew something prejudicial not to be conceded at trial) and the possible remedies for the taint. This was an error of law and so an abuse of discretion.”

The problem has never been the standard for a fair trial. “[T]he right to jury trial guarantees to the criminally accused a fair trial by a panel of impartial, indifferent jurors. The failure to accord an accused a fair hearing violates even the minimal standards of due process.” Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717, 722 (1961). The problem has been the willingness of federal judges to enforce it, particularly after prolonged and expensive trials.

Reading this opinion, it is impossible not to think of the Stone ruling.  Ultimately, this precedent is not controlling on the D.C. Circuit but will likely be cited as “persuasive authority.” In the age of social media, courts must do a better job in pursuing evidence of juror bias. That was not done in Tsarnaev and it was not done in Stone.

Here is the decision: Tsarnaev Opinion

438 thoughts on “Is The Boston Marathon Bomber Ruling Good News For Roger Stone?”

  1. Three months was all the time necessary to apprehend, try, convict and execute a penalty related to a crime in 1865.

    – Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States, was assassinated by well-known stage actor John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865.

    – Mary Surratt, Powell, Herold, and Atzerodt were hanged in the Old Arsenal Penitentiary on July 7, 1865. On July 7, 1865, at 1:15 P.M.

  2. Jurors should be required to divulge all of their social media accounts including the passwords.

    The “can you be impartial” question is nonsense. Want to get out of jury duty? Answer that question by saying, “I’ll try.” When the lawyer or judge asks what you mean say, “Mark Twain wrote that the only way to get on a jury is to convince two lawyers and a judge that you have never had an opinion, don’t have any opinions now and are not likely to have any opinions in the future. I can’t say that.”

    Trust me…….you won’t be selected for that jury.


    “Hong Kong delays election citing pandemic”

    July 31, 2020

    By Yanni Chow and Carol Mang

    HONG KONG (Reuters) – Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam on Friday postponed a Sept. 6 election to the Chinese-ruled city’s legislature by a year because of a rise in coronavirus cases,

  4. If you are more upset about the trial and sentencing of Roger Stone, a man convicted of process crimes, than that of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, a man that kill or injured 280 in a terrorist bombing, then yes, you have TDS and are wholly unfit for U.S. citizenship.

      1. He was a few years ahead of his time. Today we have anarchists being celebrated. Tomorrow it will be terrorists.

      2. Independent–“Wasn’t Tsarnaev in the process of turning his life around?”
        He’s cute. He should be put in general population. Some of the folks there are likely to turn him around.

          1. Front and back, top and bottom. Couldn’t happen to a nastier person. Leave him wishing for lethal injection.

            1. Young: I am appalled by your comment above. I am 72 years old and have met two Presidents, Kennedy when I was a teen-ager (friend of a friend of my family) and Reagan when I was a young adult and involved in his campaign. Both were reasonable men. Both were gentlemen.

              This background demonstrates why I had such a tough time voting for Trump — because I feared he would not be presidential. When folks asked me four years ago who I was voting for, I responded: “I am voting for the buffoon.” My first choice was Santorum; when he was no longer competitive, I threw in with Rubio; and after his campaign’s demise, shifted to Cruz. So Trump was my fourth choice — actually lower than that but he was the survivor.

              I am a free-market Conservative, and a supporter of law AND order. I am distressed at the very real possibility that the senescent Mr. Biden and his coterie of Left-wing loonies might be elected. So be it.

              But the above preface is just to show my bona fides. Why am I appalled by Young’s remark? Because it is unbecoming.

              The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty. The alternative is life without parole. So far, so good. But the alternative is not “life with torture.” And take my word for this, being forcibly buggered is torture.

              I understand that to those deeply moved by the Boston Marathon terror acts — and the loved ones of ALL terror victims — but we can never allow that deep feeling to cause us to abscond from our regard for the law. And the law, like it or not, is what the Nine Old Men and Women say it is. Period. If we support torture for anyone, then we are just as bad as those to whom we would mete out such treatment. My grandfather left Calabria in his teens (turn of the last century) to escape vendettas, blood feuds and the like that were de rigueur in his home country. Besides economic advancement, he was attracted by the notion of impartial law. If we allow that system of law and order to deteriorate, we will end up no better than savages in a state of nature.

              Be well,

              Arthur J. Maurello, B.A. Cornell 1970, J.D. Univ. of Michigan 1972

  5. Professor Turley asks whether the Boston ruling is good news for Roger Stone, because both cases had allegations of jurors not telling the truth. But the Boston case decided absolutely nothing about this issue:

    “Dzhokhar argues that both #138 and #286 lied under oath during voir dire about their social-media postings. And, he says, by not striking them for cause, the judge robbed him of his constitutional rights to due process, an impartial jury, and a reliable sentencing decision”. (p.51 of the slip opinion)

    “But our decision on the content-specific-questioning issue makes it unnecessary to address the misconduct charge”. (p.74)

    So, no, on that contention by Stone, the Boston ruling is not good news for good old boy Roger. Did Professor Turley make that clear?

    1. What is the distinction that you think is significant.

      Tsarnov’s juror’s made clearly biased social media posts. The judge barred deeper voire dior.
      The bias was later discovered and the defense objected.

      The pattern is exactly the same.

      TSarnov should not have been tried in Boston.
      Stone should not have been tried near DC.

      But the Stone issues is worse – because Stone is not actually guilty of anything and the charges never should have come to trial much less before a jury.

      You may not like Stone – that is your right. But we convict people of actual crimes – not political views we do not like.

      If you are going to convict Stone – then there is a long list of democrats and members of DOJ/FBI who should be looking at orange jumpsuits.

      All political behavior we do not like is not a Crime

  6. Another clear example of Turley using the “Bill Barr Summary” Facts be damned, and evidence, it doesn’t matter.

    1. There were more miscreant actions by the DOJ, FBI Director, and FBI agents, CIA, etc, than just one bad juror for Gen Flynn and also for Roger Stone. For the record, I believe AG Barr is a straight shooter. But there again only a Liberal Dems opinion matters. Perhaps The John Durham report will remove most of the skeletons from the corrupt closet from obama on down. Selah

      1. Regarding Above:

        Durham’s report will be the tree that fell in the forest when no one was there.

  7. Stone’s Defense Had Every Opportunity To Bump Hart Off Juty

    Professor Turley misrepresents this issue. The truth is that Stone’s defense had hired extra personnel to screen a list of potential jurors. And Judge Berman allowed them 3 business days to conduct said screening. Stone’s Defense simply dropped the ball on Hart. They missed her affiliations and made no effort to examine her in court.

    What’s more, there were ‘no’ reports by fellow jurors that Hart was a biased Foreperson. To the contrary, fellow jurors felt that Hart was totally fair and diligent. In short Stone’s Defense not only failed to thoroughly screen Hart, they failed to prove, in any way, that Hart had demonstrated any bias in her duties.

    In other words, ‘there is no wrongdoing of any kind here that would warrant a new trial’. Turley is essentially beating a false drum. What’s more Roger Stone is totally undeserving of any sympathy. Yet by writing this column Turley proves he is still a Trump enabler even after Trump threatens to delay and, or, sabotage the election.

    1. “What’s more, there were ‘no’ reports by fellow jurors that Hart was a biased Foreperson. To the contrary, fellow jurors felt that Hart was totally fair and diligent.”

      Indeed Seth. The entire point being that everyone not a zombie has political opinions and we are not guaranteed a jury without them. It is not possible that JT can be a law professor and not understand this, along with the fact that the issue before the Mueller investigation was not “collusion”. His repeating this nonsense speaks to his intelligence or his honesty.

    2. Co-Founder Of Federalist Society Writes Op-Ed Calling For Trump’s Removal From Office

      Today’s New York Times editorial page carries this opinion that may indicate serious trouble for Trump among the Republican establishment.
      Column cites Trump’s suggestion that election be delayed as an inexcusable threshold that warrants immediate impeachment. Comically Reader Comments range from “We told you so” to “What took you so long?”.

      1. Actually, what it indicates is that a big bloc of the Republican establishment has zero rapport with Republican voters, something we’ve known for years. Only about 10% of all self-identified Republicans are notably dissatisfied with Trump, the same 10% who are notably dissatisfied with any Republican president. ‘Dissatisfied’ means just that. This man had a lunatic public meltdown and it wasn’t doing him any favors to publish it. What it amounts to is an instruction to current and future Republican presidents (and their staffs) to not return his calls.

        1. Absurd, whatever. You’re not mentioning the meltdown Trump had over Fauci’s popularity. In fact you’re pretending here that Trump is just fine.

    3. If a trial leading to verdict and judgment is discovered to be fatally flawed the judgment will be set aside. That is true even if the fatal law is counsel’s own incompetence.

    4. If a trial leading to verdict and judgment is subsequently found to be fatally flawed the judgment will be set aside even if the fatal flaw is counsel’s own incompetence.

        1. Seth– I don’t know what that means. Chrome crashed and I thought a post did not go in so I reloaded and tried again with the original post and also with a Test post on this thread. I noted, as you have seen, that my first attempt later came up as Anonymous and the second with my screen name. I don’t use other names, but I suspect you will not be persuaded one way or the other. I do wonder if there is anyone here you have not accused of being someone else. It seems to be an obsession with you. Who really cares who anyone is?

          1. Young, since about the time you started commenting here, we have seen these comment threads heavily padded with puppets bearing goofy names. These puppets have made the blog meaner and stupider than it was before. And, I noted, this all began around Easter when you first started commenting.

            1. A lot of those puppets were none other than you. Right Deke Thornton? Do you realize what an idiot you make of yourself?

              1. Shut up, Alan! Senile farts like you welcome all the puppets because they make you look more real.

                1. ‘Trump is dumb and I am Senile’. Where does that put you Paint Chips? You can’t even up your status from imbicile to idiot to moron status when being soundly put in your place by a senile old guy. How much more of a fool do you want to make of yourself?

                  1. Alan, I prefer ‘you’ to the puppets. Honest to god I do. You look ‘real’ compared to them. And you’re a funny character (in a very nasty way). Your comments are genuine as opposed to the puppets.

                    As I once noted here: ‘Only the best writers can craft multiple characters every day’. For this reason alone the puppets are monotonous. It gives the blog a cult-like tone. Like some creepy dead-ender is fielding imaginary loyalists.

                    1. ” And you’re a funny character (in a very nasty way)”

                      Paint Chips, I am known for being on the humorous and serious side but very gentle towards people who some might say aren’t the brightest crayons in the box. People recognize me for hearing them out and responding in a helpful way. However, I don’t feel the same towards hateful hypocrites that use broad brushes to smear people. Unfortunately, this list seems to have brought out the most hateful hypocrites I have ever interacted with.

                      You choose your demeanor. I believe your choices have been wrong. Perhaps you don’t like to think and that lack influences your demeanor in a bad way while you try to preserve your beliefs against the thoughtful thinking of others.

                2. Seth Warner Explainer

                  Yes, it appears Warner is being rude to a senior here. ‘A terrible reflection on liberals?’

                  But this particular senior inserts false narratives on a chronic basis. He has, in fact, misrepresented every comment Warner ever posted. Alan has done the same to every liberal commenter on this blog. Alan loves to define liberals with false narratives.

                  Yes, Seth Warner has undergone name changes. But Warner has always posted with distinct designs and features. What’s more Warner has kept his names within certain groups obvious to those familiar.

                  Warner has also been a target of repeated smears. Which forced him to stay a moving target. Warner adopted this strategy simply to avoid confrontations.

                  Warner, however is NOT in the habit of creating new identities each day. Warner would rather be credited under a single name. And that’s the false narrative Alan seeks to insert. Alan would like readers to think Seth Warner is fielding liberal puppets.

                  Liberal commenters on this thread are limited to recognizable names. Conservative regulars know which liberal names they might see any day. Seldom do new liberals pop in and out.

                  But each day a fresh group of goofy names parrots two or three talking points dear to Trump supporters. These puppets have been active since the week of Easter. It was about that point Warner noticed extraneous names echoing similar comments. Comments that sound like angry Trumpers threatening big trouble!

                  1. “But this particular senior inserts false narratives on a chronic basis. ”
                    I have no interest in “naratives” – what are the facts ?

                    “He has, in fact, misrepresented every comment Warner ever posted.”
                    We can all see your comments, If you link to them – I am not going to look at them again.

                    Explain in words using facts and logic how Allan has “misrepesented” you ?

                    Has he Falsely accused you of lying ?
                    Have you not said what he says that you said ?
                    Has he edited what you have said to distort its meaning ?

                    Demonstrate these clearly.

                    I would note that all 3 of these are done commonly by the left – and increasingly by the media.

                    That one of the biggest reasons Trump won in 2016 was that he pushed back against this.

                    That when you made false accusations of racism, bigotry, etc. Trump pushed back. He did not back down on his remarks.
                    You accused him – he counter accused you. And that bought him millions of votes from people who have said the same or similar things and been called racist. or who have thought the same things and shutup for fear of what you would call them.

                    When you redefine racism so that everyone is racist – you assure that everyone votes against you.

                    Hitler was careful when he picked the Jews as his target – there were not that many of them.

                    Most of the country is not happy with uncontrolled immigration. When you call everyone who thinks our borders need some control racist – you are calling most of the country racist.

                    We are past the culture wars on Homosexualtiy. It is little more than months from the moment that Barack Obama became more accepting of homosexuality than the right abandoned the fight. All that any on the right are looking for is to not have your values forced down their throats. Most of us think that Phillips the Master Cake baker should bake cakes for Gays – and BTW has will bake wedding cakes for gays.
                    Just not custom designed cakes. he considers himself an artist and beleives that he should not be forced by the state to produce messages that someone else determines.

                    Can Sheldon Adelson hire Andres Serrano to produce “Piss Obama” ?

                    Most of the country is angry about Ofc. Chauvin. But few of us think anarchy is the solution.

                    Most of us grasp that while police might need reform. That fundimentally they have been doing a good job for the past 30 years.
                    Crime WAS way down. That is good for all of us. More Blacks have been killed in violence since George Floyd’s death than all blacks killed by police in all of 2019. More black pre-teens have been killed in the past month than unarmed black men in 2019.

                    Whatever the problems with policing – and we can address them – the left has gone bat$h!t.,

                    Nearly all americans support protest – even when we do not agree with those protesting.

                    But we do not support violence, arson, destruction.

                    Are you protesting Neiman Marcus ? Walmart ? Target ? The local Pawn Shop ?
                    Then WTF are you doing in the central business district ? That is NOT where you go to protest government, That is NOT where you go to protest police.

                    A few weeks before the Floyd protests – as democrats in the house noted – armed lockdown protestors – many accusing democratic governors of being nazi’s went to an assortment of City Halls and state capitals. No one was killed, no police were injured, there were no scuffles. they protested during the day – the petitioned government – where government was at. And they went home.

                    If you are in a protest and people are throwing rocks – go home. If you do not, you may be arrested and I will have no sympathy for you.
                    If you are in a protest and someone throws molotov cocktails – go home.
                    If you are protesting Government – and people head to the Central Business district – go home – that is not where government and the police are. I do not give a $h!t if you claim to be a “wall of mom’s” if those you are sheilding are using fireworks, pellet guns, lasers, rocks, etc to harm anyone – including law enforcement. If you are trying to tear down a fence – you are a rioter not a protestor.

                    If you want to challenge the law – you do not burn down the court house – you make your case in court. If that does not work – you win elections and change the law.

                    The point is all the false naratives are yours.

                    You want the rest of our sympathy, our attention – behave like responsible adults.
                    We see what you have done in CHAZ in your “protests” – no sane person would give you power.

                    You have very effectively demonstrated you can not be trusted to use it wisely.

                    We do not give the power of government to 4 year olds.

                    Grow up.

                  2. “Alan has done the same to every liberal commenter on this blog. Alan loves to define liberals with false narratives.”

                    Do you prize individual liberty as a core value ? If not, you are not a liberal. You are an orwellian language manipulator.

                    There are a few actual liberals on this blog – you are not one of them. Those on the left are not liberal.

                    You are not entitled to call yourself something you are clearly not – that is lying.

                    That is no different from your calling others racist when they are not – that is lying.

                    You are upset about what Allan says about you.

                    While you have given me no reason to beleive Allan is wrong,

                    But lets assume for the sake of argument that he is misrepresenting you – you do that of others all the time.
                    You called yourself a liberal. You clearly do not hold individual liberty as a core value.

                    If you misuse words – how can anyone trust you ?

                    You say Allan is misrepresenting you. Maybe he is – but if so, how is he doing any differently than you do all the time ?
                    You just called yourself liberal. You have destroyed the meaning of liberal – like so many other words.
                    Why ? There was no need to change the meaning of liberal ?
                    What is wrong with calling yourself what you are ?

                    Go find a word that ACTUALLY reflects, YOUR values, your principles ?

                    When you are honest with language – then maybe I will be interested in what you say – about Allan, about anything.

                  3. “Yes, Seth Warner has undergone name changes. But Warner has always posted with distinct designs and features. What’s more Warner has kept his names within certain groups obvious to those familiar.”

                    Who Cares ?

                    “Warner has also been a target of repeated smears.”
                    How so ?

                    “Which forced him to stay a moving target.”
                    No it did not. No one forced you to do anything.

                    You have very bizarre ideas. Smears that are obviously false redound on those who make them.
                    If you have actually been smeared here – most of us will grasp that and whatever name you use will fain stature. not lose it.

                    If you have chosen to abandon a name – it would be because the smears were either true or close enough to.

                    The only person who can truly smear you is yourself.

                    I have told YOU and others – that I demand links, cites and strong proof from those who have sold the “collusion delusion”.
                    That is the price that people pay for pushing lies.

                    Conversely those such as myself who has rejected an obviously false claim from the start, have enhanced our integrity – we are entitled to be beleived just because we say something is true – because we have a long track record of having been right – when all arround us have been wrong.

                    Of course we can lose that integrity in a minute – if we do not continue to be truthful and accurate, if we make false claims, if we accuse others falsely of moral failure. Maintaining integrity requires great care.

                    “Warner adopted this strategy simply to avoid confrontations.”

                    Why ? If you are falsely accused – defend yourself – there is nothing wrong with verbal confrontation – especially when you are right and being falsely accused.

                    Guess what, life is difficult – there is no free ride, you will be accused of many things, It is not avoidable. Hopefully they will be false.
                    Regardless, you do not always get to run and hide.

                    “Warner, however is NOT in the habit of creating new identities each day. Warner would rather be credited under a single name. And that’s the false narrative Alan seeks to insert. Alan would like readers to think Seth Warner is fielding liberal puppets.”
                    If that is what you want – then DO THAT. If you change your colors every day like a chameleon – the assumtpion will be the claims made about you are correct.

                    “Liberal commenters on this thread are limited to recognizable names.”
                    Those on the left are not liberal. That is false representation – lying. I guess that means you have to change your identity again.
                    No one is limited in their choice of names.

                    “Conservative regulars know which liberal names they might see any day. Seldom do new liberals pop in and out.”
                    Liberal still does not mean lefty.

                    You are free to pop in and out as you please no one is stopping you.
                    If you want a friendly unchallenging audience – go to DailyKOS.

                    If all you want is people who think like you – there are myriads of places you can find wall to wall lefties.
                    You are not however entitled to make the entire world a lefty echo chamber.

                    Though there is lots of crappy posts – some from the right most from the left, this blog is a place were top a small extent Ideas actually have to compete. There is no echo chamber.
                    That is a very good thing.

                    “But each day a fresh group of goofy names parrots two or three talking points dear to Trump supporters.”

                    There are very few Trump psychopants here – possibly none. There are alot of people who grasp that Trump is better than the alternatives.
                    That does not make us “trump supporters” – it does not even make us “trump voters”.

                    Make your arguments using FACTS, LOGIC, REASON. Do not fixate on PEOPLE, but on ideas.

                    “These puppets have been active since the week of Easter.”
                    You complain about being maligned and here you are defaming half the blog.

                    “It was about that point Warner noticed extraneous names echoing similar comments. Comments that sound like angry Trumpers threatening big trouble!”

                    If it is a crime to have similar values – then the left is damned. If it is a crime to be angry – who is it out their burning and looting ?

                    The so called Trump Supporters you are ranting about do appear to be angry. So angry they are going to vote.

                    I see “big trouble” right now. i have seen “big trouble” for decades, but getting much worse in the past 4 years.

                    I see a left that did not accept the results of a presidential election and has spent 4 years trying to stage a coup burn the country down.
                    That seems pretty angry to me.

                    I think there will be “big trouble” when Trump wins in November.
                    The source of that “big trouble” will be you.

                    Let me make a suggestion. Make your case to the voters with words, arguments. Do not defame those you disagree with – show why you are right and they are wrong. Do not lie about your opponents. Burn your copy of Alinsky. Do not make appeals to emotion, make your case with FACTS, LOGIC reason. Do not try to game the election. We expect any citizen who is registered and eligable to vote and wants to, to be allowed to do so. And no one else. We expect that those voting feel strongly enough to get up out of their chairs and walk or driver to the polling places, to demonstrate to election officials that the are who they claim to be. This is not 1787 when the polling officials knew each voter on sight. Then we can decide how we will procede at the ballot.

                    If you can persuade legitimate voters to get up off their asses on their own and go to the polls and in secret vote THEIR wishes,
                    then we must all accept the results of the election.

                    Outside of the issues that most of us debate – there are litterally billions at stake in an election. No matter who wins many will get richer and others will get poorer. Do you think that any process where billions are at stake is not going to draw fraud like flies ?

                    In 2001 we got rid of mechanical voting machines, Examinations of those found not a single one that had not had teeth ground off or other alterations for the purpose of tilting an election. Worse still – the changes made for one election continue to effect elections for decades.

                    Left and right have engaged in election fraud. While democrats have a long long long history of election fraud, anyone who thinks all republicans are saints is an idiot. I was deeply concerned in the 2000 election that if the uncertainty continue too long that credible accusations of fraud would start flying.

                    While Bush and Gore may not have engaged in Fraud – I doubt there is a single election ever with millions of votes case that several thousand fraudulent votes are not cast (or destroyed) on either side.

                    It is actually possible to ensure that elections are conducted without fraud.
                    In person voting – I have voted Absentee once – I still had to do so in person. It was not “vote by mail”
                    With verifiable ID.
                    With accurate voter rolls.
                    Then secure/preserve the actual ballots CAREFULLY.

                    So long as the raw ballots exist and are secured, There is no reason to engage in fraud in counting and reporting – because you will get caught.

                    Every single voting change those on the left want – increases the chances of fraud.

                    It is not enough that our elections are without fraud – even more importantly we need to BELEIVE the results.

                    We are headed for an election that no one is going to beleive the results – no matter what they are.
                    And the left is rushing towards that like a freight train.

                  4. “But this particular senior inserts false narratives on a chronic basis.”

                    There are facts in my narratives so I ask you to provide facts when you rebut it. A narrative from Wapo is not a rebuttal unless facts are included. An article from Wapo is not a rebuttal unless you point out the portion of the article that is a rebuttal. Sometimes the entire article might be a rebuttal with facts and that might be acceptable.

                    “He has, in fact, misrepresented every comment Warner ever posted.”

                    If that is so why can’t you correct him with facts?

                    “Liberal commenters on this thread are limited to recognizable names. ”

                    Like Joe Starret, Nick Barkley, Patriot, Rou Coffee, Philip Skene, Pike Bishop and the others I mentioned yesterday? all of them are your names. Cannot you see that you are the biggest hypocrite of all?

  8. “Jackson refused a new trial, making a mockery out the entire voir dire process.”

    It’s striking that Turley quotes a number of people, but doesn’t quote or link to Judge Jackson’s ruling. Perhaps that’s because she had good reason to refuse a new trial, as the problem was with the defense’s questions during voir dire (Hart didn’t lie in her answers) and their own failure to investigate at the time, when everything that they later cited was public info:

    An excerpt from Judge Jackson:
    “It is important to emphasize that the question before the Court is not whether the defense would have taken a different approach towards the juror if had it seen the posts earlier. The trial is over, and a verdict – which was based largely on the defendant’s own texts and emails, and was amply supported by this undisputed evidence – has been returned. At this point, it is incumbent upon the defendant to demonstrate that the juror lied, and that a truthful answer would have supplied grounds for the Court to strike her for cause. Also, a defendant seeking a new trial must establish that the information presented in his motion could not have been discovered earlier through the exercise of due diligence. Only if those criteria are met would one then assess whether the lack of the newly discovered evidence affected the conviction.
    “The defendant has not shown that the juror lied; nor has he shown that the supposedly disqualifying evidence could not have been found through the exercise of due diligence at the time the jury was selected. Moreover, while the social media communications may suggest that the juror has strong opinions about certain people or issues, they do not reveal that she had an opinion about Roger Stone, which is the opinion that matters.”

  9. The juror in the stone case, who is an attorney, should be disbarred for not being honest with the Court and the Defense, in the Stone case. In the case of the Boston Bomber, the court did a disservice to our country, and sent the wrong message to potential terrorists.

    1. “The juror in the stone case, who is an attorney, should be disbarred for not being honest with the Court and the Defense, in the Stone case.”

      I agree, do you have any specifics in mind? It’s tough in part because the Bar, I think, is politically corrupted. The idea of justice seems to have been lost.

    2. Maybe you should read what the juror was actually asked and what she actually said before you decide that she was “not … honest with the Court and the Defense.”

      The judge disagrees with you, and I bet that Judge Jackson has looked much more closely at the actual evidence (e.g., voir dire transcript) than you have. But if I’m wrong, how about you quote the question(s) and dishonest answer(s) you’re referring to.

  10. Many years ago I saw a PBS documentary “fly-on-the-wall” of a criminal court case.
    At Jury selection defense lawyer asked a prospective jurer “do you have any preconceptions about the defendent?”
    “I do not” replied the jurer.
    “I reject this candidate” Said the defence lawyer.
    Bemused, the Judge asked him why.
    “Becuase my client should be presumed innocent until proven guilty!”

  11. Judge Jackson should, when jury foreperson and attorney Tomeka Hart’s systematic malice toward defendant Roger Stone and his associates became evident, have excused Hart from the jury. At that point, Hart was clearly not just incapable of being an objective juror – she demonstrated her disinclination to be an objective juror. Judge Jackson, by empaneling a jury with such a clearly biased foreperson, demonstrated her own disinclination to give the defendant a fair trial.

    The issue ceased at that point to merely be juror misconduct on Tomeka Hart’s part, but judicial error on Judge Jackson’s part. It’s wasn’t necessary for Roger Stone to be a likable defendant for him to remain entitled to a fair trial. I don’t doubt for a moment that an objective jury and judge would have found Stone guilty of at least some of the charges of which he was found guilty. Judge Jackson’s judicial errors and jury foreperson Tomeka Hart’s reprehensible bias denied Roger Stone the fair trial to which he was entitled. Jackson and Hart knew better than to behave as they did.

    1. Judge Jackson should, when jury foreperson and attorney Tomeka Hart’s systematic malice toward defendant Roger Stone and his associates became evident, have excused Hart from the jury.

      That would be true if there were any evidence of “systematic malice toward defendant Roger Stone”.
      There was no evidence in regard to her opinions about Stone at all. She was clearly not a fan of Trump and a staunch Democrat who got her news from CNN. The defense knew all that and could have blocked her but chose not to.

      The fact is that if just one juror had been a Trump supporters Stone would have walked.

      The Stone case is just like the Flynn case. There is only one way the defendant gets convicted in both cases and that is if the defendant helps the prosecution. In Stone’s case the defense helped the prosecution select a jury that was all Trump haters. What are the chances that could happen without the help of the defense? Then during the trial the Stone defense put up essentially no defense.

    2. It is literally impossible for Judge Jackson to “have excused Hart from the jury,” given that the trial had been over for months.
      The question was whether to order a new trial, and Judge Jackson explained in detail why Stone’s lawyers failed to make a good case for that:
      Don’t blame Judge Jackson for the errors made by Stone’s lawyers.

      1. That is not a response. That is a referral to a library so the writer doesn’t have to prove his claim. See Sidney Powell’s responses to Judge Stone.

        Some individuals are so hateful that they have lost the meaning of justice.

        1. Whoops, I am talking about Flynn’s attorney. No matter. This guy above is hateful based in his ideological preferences. He did the same thing with Flynn as he is doing with Stone. Not providing the content to prove his case. He just loads up the reading list and tells everyone else to do the work.

          1. Your response is completely contradictory to itself and makes no sense, Allan.

            1. @Hank Bug:

              Not only that, but I quoted relevant text from the ruling in an earlier comment:
              LOL if he thinks that I have to keep quoting just to satisfy his personal desires.

              Allan has already admitted to being obsessed with me: and what follows.
              I haven’t responded to him in over 2 months. He has invented a scenario about me vis-a-vis the US v Flynn case, but he doesn’t back it up with either quotes from me or links to relevant comments from me, just endless false accusations and insults, as in the comments underneath the one I just linked to.

              1. I understand slapping down Allan on obvious falsehoods, but I don’t get otherwise engaging with him.

                1. I don’t respond to him any more. I tried when I first started commenting here, and his responses convinced me that it’s a waste of time, so I stopped. But he continues to respond to me, lying about me and insulting me (as in the comments here and the one I linked to earlier). It’s unhealthy.

                  Ironically, he complains about my having linked to the relevant judicial ruling, where Judge Jackson explains why she didn’t grant the motion for a new trial (after I’d already quoted from it earlier), but he can’t be bothered to provide a link to any comment of mine that would be actual evidence for his rantings, especially comments about US v Flynn, since Allan is fixated on his imaginings about what I said instead of dealing with what I actually said there.

                  1. “I don’t respond to him any more. ”

                    Keep explaining this. Maybe you will convince yourself. Yes, you lied about Flynn, referred to the FBI report, but you never did repeat those words because they didn’t exist. If it wasn’t so hateful to put an honored military figure in jail for no offense there wouldn’t be much to talk about but you don’t care about truth or justice so there is.

                    You have found a friend in btb who rarely gets the details correct. He has been proven wrong so many times I doubt even you would trust anything he said without verification.

                    …And then there is you egotism and outbursts against Turley one after another as if you are a professor and he is nothing more than an indolent being. You so happen to be on the same side of the aisle as Professor Turley while I am on the opposite side so it is strange that I have to defend his reputation from you. It really doesn’t mean much because his reputation will be high no matter what any of us say. Your on the the other hand stinks.

                    You are not a likeable fellow though you may think you are when the dregs of society stand with you.

                    Now you can go back to supporting rioting, looting and otherwise destroying communities while cheering the incarceration of people for their political views.

              2. “Allan has already admitted to being obsessed with me:

                CTHD takes great liberty with the truth. He can believe I am obsessed with him if he wishes but that is part of his highly inflated ego. If one reads further on CTHD’s claim of obsession one reads the following from me to him.

                “Not quite. Even the word obsession was wrongly used but I let it go. ”

                The obsession is yours based on that overinflated ego. Anyone can go to the comments section and actually read and see an overinflated ego that continuously throws petty criticisms at our host. I quoted some of those comments earlier. Not just one, but one after another with pure pettyness.

                As far as Flynn is concerned you made many comments that Flynn was guilty based on his own words and then referred people and myself to the FBI releases. Over and over you did that but you never provided the words.

                You are filled with hate and want people to go to jail whether or not they are guilty. You are a liar as well. Anyone who is not basing their opinions of ideology can make their own judgement.

  12. The answer in both cases is another trial addressing the legal complaints against the first one(s). The bomber and Stone should be retried. Then Stone should go to jail and the bomber waxed.

    1. “Then Stone should go to jail…”

      His sentence was commuted…no jail.

      How do you feel about Clapper lying to Congress? Should he have been prosecuted and sent to jail?

      1. Ivan, I don;t think Clapper should have been prosecuted, but OK with it if he was. I’m pretty sure he would not have gone to jail.

        He was asked in a public hearing a question about a classified program which did not target Americans but did harvest information about calls they may have made with foreigners under surveillance. If he answered “yes” – Wyden asked for a yes or no answer – that would have been both misleading and jeopardize a classified program.

        1. Clapper later admitted that he lied, but he said(lying again) that he misunderstood the question. He did not say he lied because he had to conceal classified information.

          Clapper was asked if the government is collecting information on millions of Americans and he said no. We now know that this was clearly a deliberate lie. The government has every single phone call and text every American sends/receives on record. The question was asked twice and he had received the question ahead of time.

          No offense, but my question was directed to Issac, not you. I’ve been able to communicate with him in a reasonable way, but never with you.

      2. I should have been more explicit. The argument here for both criminals is that the justice system failed them, in not passing them through as close to perfect set of judicial conditions as are available. The bomber was tried in the neighborhood he bombed and killed and would, it follows in theory, be subject to bias. Stone was, apparently, sent through a structure of questioning and questioners that created an imbalance.

        Those that ‘feel’ for the bomber argue that the bomber’s position of having been influenced by his older brother, who died fighting and attempting to kill, should keep him off of death row and in jail for the rest of his life or until the time is right to bring it up again, that he was just a pawn in a larger game, which would then be the argument that this poor sap has paid his debt and presents no further threat to society. This is one argument for the death penalty. That the bomber established a history of his own as a terrorist; by training in a foreign country, that he is no ‘kid’, and that he physically took part in the bombing could eventually be countered with the ‘pawn’ defense. If the bomber is tried again, there should be a condition that if found guilty and sentenced to death, the death should take place within a very short time, far less than twenty years, perhaps like the Russians do with a bullet to the back of the head immediately/seconds after the sentence is read out.

        Stone, historically, is a liar and an advocate of the mutt that commuted his sentence. Stone, like Flynn present the preposterous defense that they were manipulated and dealt with at a disadvantage vis a vis legal representation. These two power people had, perhaps, more legal weaponry than the courts. They lacked nothing at all financially; which gave them equal if not better legal power. Unfortunately commuted sentences and pardons get in the way of having them go to trial again. But, if Stone could be tried again that would be the judicially fair solution. With all his money and lawyers, have him state his case one more time. And then off to the slammer, no vaseline.

      3. Prosecuted for sedition in my opinion. Due process trial then the maximum punishment for this coup plotter

        he’s besmirched the CIA alumni with his incompetent bumbling lies and scheming, and that took a lot of effort to accomplish, considering

  13. Stone expects to be exonerated, which is why he took the commutation. It is also why Judge Berman is butthurt because she has no power over him.

    1. Just a reminder for those who haven’t seen the obvious… that Dr. Fauci is a sly partisan political hack who has been undermining Trump and intentionally deceiving and confusing the public all along. The fact that the Left has elevated him to hero status is your first clue. Fauci does indeed have a not-so-hidden political agenda. Without a doubt. —————->>>

      BREAKING: A month before the 2016 election, Dr. Fauci and his Hillary-donating Democrat wife Christine Grady attended a D.C. party co-hosted by Hunter Biden’s ex-wife, along with other anti-Trump Democratic activists, including Obama aides Valerie Jarrett and Jeh Johnson. @PaulSperry

      FEC records show the wife of NIH Dr. Anthony Fauci, who’s clashed with Trump over COVID-19 strategy, is a Democrat who donated at least $1,200 to Hillary for America & Hillary Victory Fund in 2016 campaign vs. Trump. Dr. Fauci wrote 2013 email praising Hillary. @PaulSperry

      1. Paul – Out of curiosity, since Fauci served under Republican administrations as well. Would it mean anything if he attended any Republican parties those years? BTW, have you seen the recent Vanity Fair article about Jared tossing out a national strategy to attack COVID-19 because it appeared to be hitting Blue states and the blame would go to Democratic governors? If true, it didn’t end up working out too well for your state and others and what would that say about people willing to let the other Party die for political advantage.

        1. But didn’t Covid just affect blue states? What’s the problem??? I learn everything from the Turley blog and people here have maintained that for months!! Lol

        2. “If true….” Exactly. Is it? I think not. How absurd.

          Did you see all that the Trump administration did for New York in the midst of the pandemic? Mobilizing the hospital ship Comfort, also in California another hospital ship….plus mobilizing the Army Corps of Engineers to build out field hospitals, ventilators, PPE, sending in medical relief workers to help handle the surge, laying out guidelines for states and everything else Trump and Pence made sure to do? Did you see Trump worked with Gov Newsom in Calif to make sure they had everything they needed? Did you see what the administration did to help Portland? Chicago? Oh but of course you didn’t. The news won’t report it. Did you miss all that? Because it’s not “if true…” it IS true. Big difference my friend.

          What would it say that the Democrats would leave town without making a deal with Repubs to ensure out of work and struggling Americans would get their unemployment benefit extension before it expired? What would it say that Pelosi and Schumer wanted to keep their “leverage” to be able to get more of their Progressive wish list stuffed in the relief package so rather than make sure the people have what they need NOW….Pelosi and Schumer left town for recess and they chose to let the people who are financially struggling to just wait and wonder….for the sole purpose of hurting Trump and playing election year politics? Ladies and gentlemen, THIS is the Democrat party that could care less about the little people they claim to be champions for. What a load of BS these Democrats are.

          1. The people of New York are Americans. The President is responsible to Americans. The President doesn’t ‘do for’. The President is obligated to respond in the best interests of all Americans. While the virus was gaining speed, Trump responded thusly:

            Jan 21: “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China.”
            Jan 30: “We think we have it very much under control.”
            Feb 02: “We pretty much shut it down, coming from China.”
            Feb 14: “We have a very small number of people in the country, right now, with it. It’s like around 12… Some are fully recovered already. So we’re in very good shape.”
            Feb 25: “People are getting better, they’re all getting better.”
            Feb 26: “And the 15 in a couple of days is gonna be down to close to zero.”
            Feb 28: “Coronavirus. This is the new hoax… You’ll be fine.”
            Feb 28: “It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear”
            Mar 02: “They’re going to have vaccines very soon.” Mar 03: “Not only the vaccines, but the therapies. Therapies is sort of another word for cure.”
            Mar 04: “We’re talking about very small numbers in the United States.”
            Mar 06: “I don’t need to have the numbers double because of one ship that wasn’t our fault… I like the numbers where they are.”
            Mar 06: “Anybody right now, and yesterday, anybody that needs a test gets a test. They’re there. And the tests are beautiful…. the tests are all perfect…”
            Mar 07: “It came out of China, and we heard about it. And made a good move: We closed it down. We stopped it.”
            Mar 08: “We have a perfectly coordinated and fine tuned plan at the White House.”
            Mar 10: “It’s really working out, and a lot of good things are gonna happen. Just stay calm. It will go away.”
            Mar 12: “It’s gonna go away.”
            Mar 13: “No, I don’t take responsibility at all.”
            Mar 16: “I’d rate it a 10. I think we’ve done a great job.”
            Mar 17: “This is a pandemic. I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic.”

            Look into injecting Lysol. Wearing masks is a political statement against me. etc. Pay attention. America’s greatest threat is Donald Trump.

            1. “The President is responsible to Americans. The President doesn’t ‘do for’. The President is obligated to respond in the best interests of all Americans.”

              Exactly right. My comment was in response to Enigma’s assertion about “Jared tossing out a national strategy to attack COVID-19 because it appeared to be hitting Blue states and the blame would go to Democratic governors? If true, it didn’t end up working out too well for your state and others and what would that say about people willing to let the other Party die for political advantage.”

              I was pointing out that Trump and Pence made no decisions based on what would hurt blue states in the midst of the pandemic! An absurd allegation! Exactly what the Democrats in Congress actually WOULD DO if they could. The Dems are ruthless and have shown they are willing to destroy America itself purely for political advantage if that’s what it took to take down President Trump. ‘By any means necessary’ is the Dems/media agenda. Pay attention.

            2. Hey did y’all see where the Dems filled a church down in Georgia for John Lewis’s final funeral, and as required by DC Mayor, anyone coming into DC after having been in Georgia is required to quarrantine themselves for 14 days. That would apply to Nancy Pelosi and her entire delegation of 50 or more who attended.

              But guess what? DC Mayor has exempted all John Lewis Funeral attendees from the city’s Quarantine Restrictions.

              Why? Because laws and special regulations are for the little people. THIS is the Democrat party. Laws for thee but not for me. You must wait to have your family funeral or church gathering. You may not sing in church, but we can and we did! We will memorialize our important people and march in the streets shoulder to shoulder as we see fit, while YOU are required to obey all the laws. YOU are required to follow the regs we set forth, but not “us” bc “we” are “exempted.”

              See how it works when you are a Democrat? Sickening. Trump 2020.

              1. Anonymous, I think everyone who has been waiting for a proper funeral for a loved one should be sent a picture of that service along with DC’s laws and a statement similar to yours.

              2. Anon– that is exactly what happened to us when one of our oldest friends died. Her husband of 40 years could not even visit her in the hospital as she lay dying and we had to decide which one of us could go to the funeral and which one to the graveside because we could not do both under the regulations. That night hundreds of people gathered downtown to protest and they were not required to follow the rules. That is something one never forgets.

        3. Dr. Fauci and his Hillary-loving wife are part of the Resistance. Make no mistake.

          1. When someone constantly lies, suggests disinfecting yourself with bleach or high doses of UV light; isn’t it his duty as a physician to resist?

            1. Honey, Fauci and his wife joined the Resistance the moment Trump beat their girl Hillary. And while you repeat over and over what a liar Trump is, you actually seem to believe that the Democrat politicians, Pelois, Schumer, SCHIFF! Nadler, et al….including Joe Biden and Barack Obama! don’t lie thru their teeth nearly every time they open their mouths? Come on now. You seem to believe the media doesn’t lie, lie, lie and lie all day long?? Come on now my friend. Pay attention.

                1. “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan you can keep your plan. Period.”

                  Justify that.

                  “He’s stupid.” He beat Hillary and the corrupt Clinton political machine, didn’t he? Best day of my life seeing Hillary lose.

                  Speaking of stupid, the Democrats are counting on you and the Black vote to put their “demented don’t know where I am” Joe ‘sniff the girls and make them cry’ Biden into the White House for them to manipulate as a puppet on their strings…..because remember now, if you don’t vote for Democrats, “you ain’t Black”. No sir, they count on you to let *them tell *you how to think and how to vote. If you keep voting the way they tell you to vote for the past however many decades of failed policies that don’t serve you at all? I call that stupid. Beyond stupid my friend. Trump 2020.

                    1. Trump is polling around 8% with black voters. For context: Blago had 10% approval immediately after getting caught trying to sell Obama’s vacated Senate seat in 2008. IOW it takes serious work to drop below ten percent in a poll about any subject. Trump is stepping up and crushing yet another norm.

                    1. The democrats and Hillary still haven’t accepted Trump’s victory and apparently neither have you.

                      Your projecting your failures on others.

                    2. Enigma –

                      I read your attached article. You said in the article, “I had the opportunity to vote for the first black nominee of a major party for Governor of Florida in my lifetime.”

                      You concluded your article with this sentence: “Call it the plantation if you like, I looked you over and couldn’t stomach what you have to offer.”

                      My question for you is this: are you still sure of your vote for Gillum and that you “couldn’t stomach” what R’s had to offer?

                      I mean, is this the guy you still feel good about being “first black nominee for Governor of Florida in your lifetime.” ??? I hope not, but I suspect you would rather see THIS guy than a Republican. How utterly pathetic.


                    3. The Governor we got is purposely killing Floridians to stay in favor with Trump. He’s forcing the schools to open back up and won’t mandate masks. Florida has the second most cases in the nation and the Governor has a daily press conference to tell us how great things are. He’s like Trump with a bigger vocabulary. Gillum couldn’t possibly have done any worse.

                    4. Enigma says, “The only question is, will he leave once he’s beaten.”

                      Question for you: what makes you think Trump *would not* leave? And what makes you think he *could* choose to stay put in the White House and refuse to leave office?

                      My god you are being brainwashed by the media. Sad.

                    5. ” The Governor we got is purposely killing Floridians to stay in favor with Trump.”

                      OMG. Get help my friend.

                    6. “Gillum couldn’t possibly have done any worse.”

                      Uh, yeah he could have been in the midst of a meth overdose gay orgy with paid male escorts in a hotel room in Miami while Floridians suffered the consequences. SAD. #Florida doged a bullet.

                    7. “He’s forcing the schools to open back up and won’t mandate masks.”

                      Oh the horror of liberty and personal agency. And prioritizing the welfare of our children.

                    8. “You’ll have to explain to me how killing children, not to mention their parents and grandparents, promotes the welfare of our children?”

                      Deaths per million
                      NY 1,685
                      Fl 327

                      Total deaths
                      NY 32,773
                      Fl 7,022

                      When it comes to dealing with facts Enigma is at a loss. The numbers are clear but Enigma’s opinions are worthless because he refuses to deal with facts.

                    9. “He won’t mandate masks.”

                      Would that make you feel better? To be *ordered* to wear a mask? OMG. Please stop.

                      I take it you do not know anyone with asthma?

                2. hey Enigma man, I respect that you put yourself out there with your writing and all. But don’t expect to come here and offer your really stupid mixed up opinions and have them go unchallenged.

                  Trump 2020

                    1. “You’ll have to explain to me how killing children, not to mention their parents and grandparents, promotes the welfare of our children?”

                      Hyperbolize much?

                    2. There is no question that opening the schools fully to in-person learning will kill some percentage of students, their families, teachers and administrators. The Governor;s children are too young to attend school which means he’s risking other people’s lives.
                      I know a family with high school kids that were given the option of virtual learning. Her daughter chose virtual but was informed she’d have to return the device the school provided last semester and use her own computer. She does have a laptop she shares with her brother but each student must have their own. So it works out that less well-to-do families are forced to take more risks than those with money.

                    3. Bill – if the school wants them each to have a dedicated laptop, then they need to supply it.

                    4. Bill – surprisingly they have cable, but no internet. Or they might have internet and basic cable because the kids have gaming machines. I am not sure why they cannot share a computer, unless it is a timing problem. Actually, they could record the lessons to be played later for those homes with only one computer

                    5. “I have sense enough to wear one. I don’t want other people to spread the disease.”

                      Sharing again what Dr. Anthony Fauci said about masks back during the third week of February 2020 —–>>>>

                      “Masks. The only people who need masks are those who are already infected to keep from exposing others. The masks sold at drugstores aren’t even good enough to truly protect anyone, Fauci said.

                      “If you look at the masks that you buy in a drug store, the leakage around that doesn’t really do much to protect you,” he said. “People start saying, ‘Should I start wearing a mask?’ Now, in the United States, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to wear a mask.”

                      Fauci also doesn’t want people to worry, but many are.

                      Fauci doesn’t want people to worry about coronavirus, the danger of which is “just minuscule.”

                      Got that? This was the “science” Trump was getting from the “experts” like Fauci back in late February!

                    6. Fauci has shown the ability to learn since the third week in February. Trump is going backwards. A word of advice, don’t attend his rallies without a mask. People are catching the virus like flies, some of them not recovering. But hey… freedom.

                    7. Anonymous – I have 10 N95 masks I bought before this whole crisis went down and I am only using those for going to the doctor and pharmacy. The State of Arizona gave me 5 FDA approved masks, but not medical grade which I use the rest of the time. I just ordered 3 masked from The Getty, 1 for a friend (Van Gogh) and 2 for myself (Greek mask).

                    8. “But hey, freedom.”

                      Yes, indeed.

                      I bet you can answer the question of how the Nazi’s got the people to board the cattle cars that transported them to the death camps. “Wear your masks! We mandate it! You must obey and DO as we say!”

                      Have you started wearing Goggles yet? Fauci told you to wear goggles now too, you know. And you can decorate them! Hey now!

                      Full body bubble wrap is coming next. Wait for it.

                      And as we all can see…..the “leaders” like Pelosi, et al, and those who actually “mandate” these arbitrary rules, do NOT follow the same rules themselves. Imagine that. 14 day quarantine coming back into DC after traveling to Georgia? Not for the “leaders”….they are exempted….those rules are only for YOU.

                      Wake up, man.

                    9. Dr. Fauci recommends we all wear a mask and now goggles, too. It’s for your own protection, after all. Truth? Pulling a cotton bandanna up over your mouth to enter a store does absolutely nothing to protect you from the virus nor does it protect others from you if you happen to have the virus! You are being played.

                      Here’s a lesson: Never trust a man who has spent 50 years working in the federal government and who doesn’t bother to learn how to throw a baseball before publicly tossing out the first pitch to start the season! He says he “miscalculated the distance” he had to throw the ball. Incompetent? Remiss? Lazy? Arrogant? Stupid? All of the above. There’s a saying, “How you do one thing is how you do everything.” Fauci is an incompetent fraud and political hack who should have been fired months ago.

                      Oh and you want to blame someone for *actually* killing grandparents? That’s NY Democrat Governor Andrew Cuomo. Did you hear that ‘5,000 People Died After Andrew Cuomo’s Order Forcing Nursing Homes to Accept Coronavirus Patients’?

                    10. I would not be so hard on Faucci as you.

                      Meaning SOMEONE was going to have his position.

                      And the fact is people wanted and needed some expert to tell them how to keep safe – even if that was not possible.

                      I do not trust Faucci or those in government for two reasons.
                      The data does not support them, and
                      Their goal is NOT to save lives – with very few exceptions that is outside of their control.
                      Their goals is make people FEEL that things are not out of control.

                      And yet they are.

                    11. Anonymous is wrong. Wearing a mask can stop your spreading the virus and with less effectiveness, prevent your catching it. Social distancing is also an effective means of limiting the spread of this highly contagious virus.

                      Approximately 95% of the spread of the virus is due to the direct interaction of humans, with only about 5% transmission from inanimate surfaces.

                      Based on this information, we should try to wear masks in public at all times and as a public emergency, the President should encourage this behavior, including encouraging Governors and/or local governments making mask wearing mandatory with fines for non-compliance. It’s a no-brainer and something The Greatest Generation would get from their sacrificial acts during another public emergency – WWII. Our snowflake Boomers, Zs, and Millenials are meantime crying about their poor poor rights to party and infect other people.

                      “They gotta’ be them!”


                    12. You have actual data on Masks ?

                      To my knowledge there are only laboratory studies – not in vivo studies.

                      For every 100 things that world against C19 in vitro only one is effective in vivo.

                      Even the lab studies do not demonstrate that PPE STOPS C19 only that it SLOWS its spread.

                      In actual in vivo hospital studies with the Best PPE – masks googles etc. – labortaory 97% effective, after 2 months nearly all healthcare workers tested positive either for C19 or had antibodies.

                      Social distancing does not STOP C19, it SLOWS it.

                      There are only THREE things that are known to actually STOP an infectuous disease:

                      Herd Immunity
                      atleast a 95% effective quarantine.
                      A cure.

                      Every other policy SLOWS the spread – it does not STOP it.
                      It does not reduce the total infected,
                      It does not reduce the total dead.

                      This is not knew knowledge.
                      It is not specific to C19.

                    13. “Wearing a mask can stop your spreading the virus and with less effectiveness, prevent your catching it.”

                      You have real world controlled studies of this ? No one else does.
                      Source ?

                      “Social distancing is also an effective means of limiting the spread of this highly contagious virus.”
                      Again actual real world studies ?

                      “Approximately 95% of the spread of the virus is due to the direct interaction of humans, with only about 5% transmission from inanimate surfaces.”
                      I have no idea if you are correct. But you are not a trustworthy reporter – so how about a source.

                      “Based on this information,”
                      What information ? You have made claims, that is not information.

                      “we should try to wear masks in public at all times and as a public emergency,”
                      Aside from virtue signalling why ?

                      “the President should encourage this behavior,”
                      Why ? Everyone within 100 yards of Trump is tested.

                      ” including encouraging Governors and/or local governments making mask wearing mandatory with fines for non-compliance.”
                      Why should we make something with no real world data manditory ?

                      I would further note that you do not seem to understand what manditory means,
                      It means “men with guns” – you know, those police you are trying to get rid of.

                      “It’s a no-brainer”
                      That we should do things to feel good by force absent actual data ?

                      “and something The Greatest Generation would get from their sacrificial acts during another public emergency – WWII.”
                      Some things you can not virtue signal your way out of.

                    14. He was a civil rights icon

                      He was one of seven people who ran the Student Nonviolent Co-ordinating Committee over the period running from 1960 to 1967, and not the most consequential of them at that time. For the period running from 1966 to 1985, I think you’d have a hard time finding newspaper references to him outside of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The ‘icon’ hoo-ha was manufactured by the meme pushers at PBS, among other places.

                      Again, what do we hear today about Roy Wilkins, Whitney Young, James Farmer, Bayard Rustin, &c? Not a whole lot. Young died on the job in 1971; the others died after they’d retired; they received the obituaries once-prominent men receive. Back in 1965, they mattered rather more than did John Lewis.

                    15. Roy Wilkins – the head of the NAACP – and the others mentioned by absurd were considerably older than Lewis then and were spokesmen and organizer.s They did not get their heads knocked as did he, and as the decade wore on, and it’s major achievements – the CR Acts – already in place partly due to his efforts and theirs, being a member of the that establishment did not carry the cahe or gain the historic results already won. Those results were earth changing in America and especially in the south.

                  1. ByTheBook….I said pulling a cotton bandanna up over your mouth does nothing to protect you from the virus nor does it protect others from you if you happen to have the virus. A proper medical mask, worn correctly, will offer some protection.

                    1. As Dr. Fauci said, “The only people who need masks are those who are already infected to keep from exposing others. The masks sold at drugstores aren’t even good enough to truly protect anyone.”

                      So pulling a piece of cotton bandanna up and down over your face does what? Nothing.

                    2. Thanks for the clarification anonymous, but on even this you are wrong. A cotton bandanna may do both those things, though not as effectively as a medical mask.

                    3. “Thanks for the clarification anonymous, but on even this you are wrong. A cotton bandanna may do both those things, though not as effectively as a medical mask.”

                      There is no data on:

                      Cotton Bandana’s
                      Medical Masks
                      Even N95 Masks – out side of the labortory.

                      If you wish to use force the very least you should be able to do, is demonstrate from solid data that what you want will work.

                      We get leftists saying there are not double blind controlled studies on HCQ.

                      There are no in vivo studies on N95 Masks, Medical Masks or bandana’s.

                      There are atleast real world controled studies for HCQ – please cite any such studies for masks ?

                      You also seem to think things are binary.

                      I wear a mask. I am in a higher risk group, and even a small benefit might be worthwhile.
                      I do so as a CHOICE.

                      Even if masks were PROVEN effective – they should be a choice.
                      Certianly not without proof.

                      Further like pretty much all measures – they are a delaying tactic, not real prevention.
                      My objective is to delay until we reach herd immunity.

                      But if everyone is delaying – I am forked.

                3. Enigma– “He not only lies EVERY time he opens his mouth, he’s stupid.”

                  I could see where you truly believe that. You don’t understand what he is saying.

                  And, no, I am not going to explain it to you.

      2. Yeah, because we must all divide on ideology now, and especially loyalty to Trump. How else can people continue to believe the nonsense he spews daily?

        1. Facts my friend. Just looking at facts. Fauci has made numerous mistakes, miscalculations, misjudgments and has been off by a mile on much of it with this pandemic– including his embarrassing first pitch last week where he says he “miscalculated the distance from the mound to the plate” — a distance which has been the same for a hundred years! But the Left says “it’s okay, Dr. Fauci was too busy to practice!” And they still heap praise on the guy! Guess what? If Fauci is too busy to practice and too busy with a pandemic response, then he should DECLINE the invitation to throw out the first pitch! But Fauci is enjoying his Lefty celebrity status so he went and did it disastrously bc he was too incompetent to find out the distance he has to throw the dam ball in front of the TV cameras for all to see!!? What does that tell us about Dr. Fauci’s “judgment”? A hell of a lot. It is right on par with all the other “miscalculations” and “misjudgments” he has been making since the getgo. He is a saboteur. Without question Fauci is a political hack with an agenda of his own.

          1. “But the Left says “it’s okay, Dr. Fauci was too busy to practice!”

            I think I’ll leave this “controversy” to you.

            Fauci is straddling the fence to prop Trump up, and Trump knows it or he would have fired him already out of jealousy. If Fauci was as you allege, he’d quit with a denounciation of the cluster f…k response from Trump, make huge headlines and be a welcome guest anytime on any news show he wished to get on.

            1. Fauci would have quit? No, he wouldn’t. He’s not that principled. But Trump should have fired him months ago for the cluster**** Fauci’s pandmenic response handling has been.

              “During a recent episode of the Thomas Paine Podcast, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. blew the lid on Dr. Anthony Fauci’s extensive legacy of fraud and coverups throughout his lengthy medical career in the federal government.

              Kennedy explained that Fauci has been a problematic character all throughout his more than 50-year tenure in public health, during which he operated as a workplace tyrant and ruined the careers of countless physicians and researchers who, unlike himself, were upstanding and honorable individuals.

              Fauci has been with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984 – can you say deep state? – and he’s known among those on the inside as the guy who “poisoned an entire generation of Americans,” according to Kennedy.

              In at least one instance, Fauci targeted a whistleblower who was trying to expose the fact that America’s blood supply is tainted with deadly disease strains. Fauci ruined the career of this physician and proceeded to cover up his crucial research on the subject.

              Kennedy also warned during the program that Fauci has attacked many other good guys who’ve tried to actually serve the public rather than shill for Big Pharma, Bill Gates, the mainstream media and other deep state assets and mouthpieces of deception and lies.

              The entire Thomas Paine Podcast episode, which is a little more than two-and-a-half hours long, is available at this link.”

              1. I didn’t say Fauci was principled. He may well not be, though there is the possibility he thinks he’s doing the Lord’s work straddling the fence by refusing to say clearly how f..ked the ongoing federal response is while trying to agree with whatever passing and temporal comment Trump makes (“the school should be reopened”) let’s him keep his position from which he then launches his occasional specific criticisms. His value to the administration as lending it some minimal authority is proved by the fact that Trump has not fired him. At 79 years old, and with his reputation, I believe his value to the country would be better served by pulling off his mask and calling a cluster f..k a cluster f..k. His authority would not diminish but grow and he and we could quit pretending there is a leader in the WH for the virus response.

                1. ” how f..ked the ongoing federal response is”
                  And you have data on that ?

                    1. That is correct, I have not seen any data that makes a case that the federal response is “f..ked’.

                      I get all kinds of bogus claims from the left.

                      But there is very little consequential difference between developed nations – and none that are not a factor of demographics and latitude.

                      If you want to claim that there has been a “f..kup” then there must he a demonstrable negative consequence.

                      Given that the absence of factors distinguishing countries, it is not possible to claim a policy failure – aside from those of some blue governors sending C19 patients to nursing homes.

                      When I ask you for data – I am not asking for information on firefly’s in china. I am looking for compelling evidence of the claims you are making.

                2. Of course schools should be reopened.

                  They never should have been closed.

                  This is one of few things we actually have pretty clear unequivocal data.

                  The risk to those under 20 is 1/5 the flu. The severity is 1/5 the flu.

                  It is possible that kids transmit C19 among themselves and too adults, But if that is true it is myriads of times less likely than the flu.

                  No sane purpose is saved by closing schools. Even colleges should reopen.

                  In fact the risk for those under 40 is either the same or lower than the flu.

                  Everyone under 40 should return to whatever they were doing pre-covid.

                  They should have no constraints on their behavior.

                  From the begining we should have focused on those at risk.

                  We knew from the data from China that C19 kills seniors.
                  Yet MOST of the world failed to protect seniors.

                  You are incredibly bad at actual data.

                  1. A Korean study found that humans between 10-20 years of age are as contagious as adults.

                    Teachers may be anywhere from 20-65 years old.

                    Kids go home to families which include humans as old as the early 90s.and even family members who’s health is otherwise compromised.

                    1. “A Korean study found that humans between 10-20 years of age are as contagious as adults.”

                      “Teachers may be anywhere from 20-65 years old.”
                      I have no problem paying teachers over 50 or teachers with documented health problems unemployment

                      “Kids go home to families which include humans as old as the early 90s.and even family members who’s health is otherwise compromised.”
                      They do so with the flu, to.

                      Regardless, what do you think those kids are doing NOW ? They are hanging around with their peers, and they are hanging arround with the same elderly people.

                      Though i would note that the left has actively been trying to destroy extended families – there are far fewer kids living with 60+ year old adults. The parents of nearly all school age kids are under 50.

                      And you still have not confirmed that kids under 20 get thus with much frequency or are contagious.

                3. “I am not persuaded that HCQ is an effective coronavirus treatment. But if I tested positive for coronavirus, and I couldn’t get HCQ+zinc+Azithromycin within 24 hours, I’d start breaking all sorts of laws without remorse.”

                  Scott Adams

                4. “BREAKING: A new study says HCQ is ineffective against coronavirus if you spray the drug on a living porcupine and shove it up your ass while praying to the Sun God. No other studies on HCQ are planned.”

                  Scott Adams

                5. Sweden which has had NO government dictats regarding Covid, now has few new daily cases, very few daily deaths and has no reason to expect any increase in the future. The NEVER locked down, Kids attended school, They had a positive 1Q GDP and the least decline in GDP of any developed nation.

                  They did significantly better than Italy, Spain, the UK and much of the rest of the EU.

                  But most importantly they have the least concerns of any country about the future.

                  Maybe they have reached herd immunity – maybe they have not, but they have no reason to expect future problems – either economic or from the virus.

                  They are not fighting over mask policies – they have none. People decide on their own.
                  They are not fighting over social distancing policies – they have none. People decide on their own.
                  They are not fighting over reopening schools – they only closed them very briefly and they have been open through this.
                  They are not fighting over lockdowns or essential businesses – they have no policies on these and people decide on their own.
                  They are not fighting over churches – people decide on their own.

                    1. Norway is less than half the population of Sweden it has fewer and smaller cities, it uses a radically different elder care system
                      Sweden has a much older population. Sweden has a much larger immigrant population.
                      Norway has a death’s/million that is 1/10th that of the rest of europe.

                      Sweden has so far done very slightly worse than the US and most of Europe, But Sweden is pretty much done.
                      They have no reason to expect any surge or spike or 2nd wave.
                      They will not have anything when they reopen – because they never closed.

                      “the current drop in fatalities is on a par with Haiti or Pakistan, countries that are struggling to control outbreaks.”
                      I have no idea what that even means. And I doubt you do.

                      If you are not prepared to accept that C19 is virtually over in Sweden – then you are not prepared to accept that it will ever be over anywhere.

                    2. Ah, you are quoting some clueless journalist.

                      Swedens deaths/million were less than Belgium. less than Spain, less than Italy, less than the UK …

                      And sweden is done or near done

                      Much of europe is not. It is likely they will have deaths/million reaching or exceeding Sweden before then are done.

                      Regardless, your article is obviously an attempt at spin.

                      European GDP was hit harder than the US Sweden has had very little economic harm.

                      The fact is YOUR policies clear do not work.
                      You have been told that over and over.

                      I would ask you why has C19 declined in Sweden ? They do not have any of the rules you claim are needed ?

                      If lockdowns etc were necescary – why is C19 ending in Sweden ?

                      Why isnt’ Sweden seeing a 2nd wave ?

            2. Fauci mistakes since MAY…and there’s more to come from May to the present….

              “It’s hard to believe but America’s top Infectious Disease Doctor Anthony Fauci has been wrong on the coronavirus pandemic —Every step of the way!
              Here is a list of several errors, contradictory statements and dangerous gaffes by NIAID Director Dr. Tony Fauci:

              1.) Dr. Fauci says he warned Trump in January that the US was in real trouble but that is not what he said publicly.

              In January Dr. Anthony Fauci told Newsmax TV that the United States “did not have to worry”about the coronavirus and that it was“not a major threat.”

              2.) Dr. Fauci warned of an apocalyptic coronavirus pandemic — then just weeks later he compared the coronavirus to a bad flu.

              3.) Dr. Fauci based all of his predictions on models the that were OFF BY MILLIONS and then later told reporters,“You can’t really rely on models.”

              4.) On March 20th Dr. Fauci jumped in and during a press briefing on hydroxychloroquine treatment for coronavirus “corrected” the president saying, “You got to be careful when you say ‘fairly effective.’ It was never done in a clinical trial… It was given to individuals and felt that maybe it worked.”

              Exactly two weeks later hydroxychloroquine was deemed the most highly rated treatmentfor the novel coronavirus in an international poll of more than 6,000 doctors.

              5.) Dr. Fauci pushed these garbage models every step of the way.

              A month ago Dr. Fauci claimed 1 million to 2 million Americans would die from coronavirus. Then he said 100,000 to 200,000 Americans will die from the virus. Three weeks ago he agreed 81,766 Americans would die from the coronavirus. Then by that Wednesday Then by that Wednesday the experts cut the number of deaths to 60,415 projected deaths. to 60,415 projected deaths.

              6.) On Easter Dr. Fauci suggested President Trump. should have shut down the economy in February… When the number of known cases in the US was around 100. Fauci later walked back his attacks.

              7.) Dr. Fauci said cruises were OK on March 9th. That was a huge error.

              8.) Dr. Fauci said malls, movies and gyms were OK on February 29th. That was another huge mistake.

              9.) Dr. Fauci was wrong about the first coronavirus deaths in the country. Dr. Fauci, Dr. Birx and the CDC were off by nearly a month. California officials revealed in Aprilthat a patient in Santa Clara died from coronavirus on February 6th not February 29th.

              10.) Dr. Fauci and the CDC missed themillions and millions of US citizenswho had already contracted the coronavirus before the draconian lockdowns took place. Knowing this could have prevented the economic calamity.

              11.) OnApril 15, 2020, Fauci endorses Tinder hookups, unbelievably.

              12.) Dr. Fauci relied on corrupt W.H.O rulesto lock down the United States and destroy the US economy. Meanwhile, this delays the herd immunity that is needed to prevent a future outbreak of this deadly virus.

              13.) Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx used the Imperial College Model to persuade President Trump to lock down the entire US economy. The Imperial model has since been confirmed as A COMPLETE FRAUD.

              14.) Dr. Fauci warned that Georgia would see a surge in coronavirus cases and deaths by opening their economy too early.

              He was wrong again– In fact the opposite happened.

              15.) And on Tuesday during testimony Dr. Fauci told Dr. Rand Paul that opening the schools would not be a good idea.”

              Now Fauci says all should wear GOGGLE and MASKS for the indefinite future!!!

              more to come….


              1. Dr. Fauci in mid February 2020:

                Top disease official: Risk of coronavirus in USA is ‘minuscule’; skip mask and wash hands

                Jayne O’Donnell
                USA TODAY

                “The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will be testing for the coronavirus in people in five major cities who show up at clinics with flu-like symptoms but who test negative for the seasonal varieties.

                If that testing shows the virus has slipped into the country in places federal officials don’t know about, “we’ve got a problem,” Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told USA TODAY’s Editorial Board Monday.

                Short of that, Fauci says skip the masks unless you are contagious, don’t worry about catching anything from Chinese products and certainly don’t avoid Chinese people or restaurants.”…..

                Fauci also said in mid FEB —->> “Skip the masks”!! “They don’t do much”!!!

                “•Masks. The only people who need masks are those who are already infected to keep from exposing others. The masks sold at drugstores aren’t even good enough to truly protect anyone, Fauci said.

                “If you look at the masks that you buy in a drug store, the leakage around that doesn’t really do much to protect you,” he said. “People start saying, ‘Should I start wearing a mask?’ Now, in the United States, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to wear a mask.”

                Fauci also doesn’t want people to worry, but many are.

                Fauci doesn’t want people to worry about coronavirus, the danger of which is “just minuscule.” But he does want them to take precautions against the “influenza outbreak, which is having its second wave.”

                “We have more kids dying of flu this year at this time than in the last decade or more,” he said. “At the same time people are worrying about going to a Chinese restaurant. The threat is (we have) a pretty bad influenza season, particularly dangerous for our children.”


  14. Broader question – using this example of posting broad dislike/hatred for categories of people – with assertions based on tribal affiliations that they are flawed/evil in some irreparable way – at what point is a fair trial for certain segments of the population (Trump allies in this example, though one could easily use other and broader categories) no longer possible? How do we keep the mob rule of Twitter from extending into the courtroom more broadly than this high profile and specific case?

  15. With the recent debacle of the DC Circuit Court in the Flynn, DOJ v Sullivan ruling, I have lost all faith in a fair and non-bias judicial system.

    1. Yep, much of the US’s judicial system has currently destroyed themselves… ie: John Roberts.

    2. There is no “Flynn, DOJ v Sullivan” case.
      The case you’re referring to is “In re: Michael T. Flynn,” and the DOJ isn’t a party to it.
      Nor is there any “debacle” in the CADC choosing to rehear the case en banc.

      1. Apologies for gate crashing this thread, just wanted to chime in on the Sandmann topic & what my views of the D.C. area are with a day or two of separation…

        -I realize urban areas are our most diverse and therefore have more availability, and acceptance, of all pov’s.
        -I was joking about lack of tolerance about maga hats, but only part way. There are indeed neighborhoods where wearing one (and it’s indeed anyone’s right to wear one as I maintained in my original post on the subject) will immediately draw negative attention because the hat represents racism/sexism/homophobia to its occupants. Basic common sense. (I do realize the monument is largely a tourist site though)
        -Nothing personally against D.C…., I spent summers there as a kid because my dad worked at NASA and later at NSF. SW N street. I carried groceries from the local Safeway to people’s apartments for a couple of bucks here and there. I learned how to play basketball on the black tops of D.C. and it shaped my game enough to put me through a couple years of playing ball in college before chronic hip and back injuries forced my having to give up the game, at least played at that level.
        -Two things about the Sandmann issue really knaw at me: a) as someone who coached high school kids in basketball for 15 yrs and presided over many school trips I can’t help but wonder where the adult supervision was on the trip Sandmann got into it with the Indian? Not saying one has to go in and drag the kid out by the ear or anything, but I am saying there was serious lack of adult presence in dragging those kids out of the situation, and, better yet, preventing it ever reaching the level it did. And b) can we just acknowledge the *staggering* level of white privilege involved with Sandmann and his parents suing CNN and the Post over the issue their kid should’ve just cut ties with, learned from, and disappeared for awhile over? If Sandmann were black or Hispanic what are the chances he wins a judgement?

        I was aware, immediately, that the memes over the subject weren’t one hundred percent true, just from having enough experience dealing with high school kids and the type of incidents they seem uniquely designed to find themselves in the middle of. There’s just so much symptomatic imbalance involved with the Sandmann situation that I find it hugely metaphoric over the state of things in the nation.

        1. Bug, this video I think covers the event pretty fairly. I fail to see anything the kids did as objectionable. It mentions there was a chaperon there who supposedly approved the school cheers.

        2. Hank Bug – evidently the boys were allowed a little free time and were then all to collect at the Memorial. When the Black Israelites started harassing them, they asked their sponsors if they could do some of their school cheers, which they did. It was during this period that Phillips approached Sandmann. There is a young man directly behind Sandmann so he cannot back up. Some of the boys got into the drumming, which didn’t seem to help any.

          The short video was sent out and everybody ran with it, even though the Black Israelites were live streaming the event. Anyone who did 15 minutes of research knew it wasn’t the total story.

          15 of the other boys are represented by Robert Barnes and are suing several news outlets and Elizabeth Warren. She has made a Federal claim that she cannot be sued for anything she says while a Senator. The Courts are backing her on this, so far.

          1. Thanks, Paul. Hey, you’re right, you can’t ride herd constantly on these trips certainly. But I’m still steamed over those kids having the ability to litigate while kids from a different demographic wouldn’t have the same opportunity. The best remedy for these kids would be to lean into anonymity for awhile, grow up, and begin their adult lives with a different perspective than the one they had going in.

            Instead, they’ve become the poster children for white privilege.

            1. Hank Bug – those boys were vilified internationally. The Bishop of their Diocese threatened publically to expel them from school, one Senator running for President vilified them and one Congresswoman vilified them. And you think they should just crawl into a cave? Nathan Phillips lied about them on national TV. If he had any money, he would be defendant one.

            2. But I’m still steamed over those kids having the ability to litigate while kids from a different demographic wouldn’t have the same opportunity.

              You’re steamed over the issue of your own imagination.

              1. Thanks for chiming in. I regard you as a master of imagination, so I appreciate the compliment!

        3. Bug,
          No problem re: the “gate crashing.” Agreed that a chaperone should have intervened, and that there’s often a significant degree of privilege in terms of filing suit, though in this case it could instead be that the lawyer volunteered to do it for a cut of the damages without Sandmann having to pay anything up front. I don’t know.

  16. In the 224-page opinion for the appellate panel

    They need to tell their clerks to be more concise. (You always get the impression that the authors of these marathons must be straining for something).

  17. The judge questioned each potential juror about “whether they could decide this high-profile case based on the evidence,” thus making them judges of their own impartiality. I’m curious about this, because I have zero experience with it. What would have been a better question?

    1. em– I’ve always thought that the best voir dire question is the one that ask about specific indicators of bias. Today, postings on social media most likely would be a good starting point, i.e. “have you ever written or said anything in any social media about [this defendant]?” If the answer is yes, then follow it up. Generalities and opinion type questions reveal very little about a person’s bias.

  18. ‘With his recent racist remark to a Black radio host, Stone continues to struggle to make himself even less popular than Tsarnaev.’
    So let me get this right- A radical Muslim terrorist kills three people and maims countless others (did you ever hear of the Richard family, whose father was killed, mother blinded, and 7 year old son lost a leg?). And Roger Stone is less popular. Only in a Progressive Wonderland. Hatred for all things Trump has no bounds.

    1. The body of people who work in higher education is amply studded with those who are not the least bit morally serious.

  19. Leave no Stone unturned but this juror bias here is unrelated to Stonehead.

Comments are closed.