Bullshit Brigade – Book Burner Edition

[NB: Check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]

This week has been rife with bullshit. Here are three egregious examples.

~ 3 ~

Meditating on the sci-fi dystopian classic, Fahrenheit 451, I’ve pondered the cultural shift from a brick-and-mortar society to a digital society, in which text printed on paper has given way to internet-mediated electronic content.

What does a fireman look like in the age of the internet?

Apparently they still look like pasty white Nazis, like this one Trumpy-buddy and VA gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin points to in Virginia – a racist mom whining about her poor baby boy whose fee-fees were hurt by an essential piece of American literature written by a Black woman author in which racism and slavery are central.

What a pity he can’t find a job after being so tormented by American literature…oh but wait.

The poor little teenager is now 27 years old and working as an attorney for the GOP. Perhaps Momma Murphy’s got a point – the kid’s intellectual growth was stunted by cognitive dissonance trying to make his artificially white privileged world meet literature reflecting the horror of enslavement upon which that white privilege was built. Now he can’t find a job anywhere except working for the party of racism in America.

Utter book burning bullshit. Stem it by helping elect Terry McAuliffe to Virginia’s governor’s office.

~ 2 ~

Speaking of the Virginia governor’s race, Jonathan Turley had to stick his two cents in because he has a problem with attorney Marc Elias.

Turley’s bitchy little dig betrays not only his ignorance about John Durham’s pathetic investigation but his concerns about Elias, who successfully won 64 out of 65 lawsuits Trump’s campaign filed to unsuccessfully contest the results of the 2020 election.

Perhaps Turley’s really worried that at some point if all the investigations into Team Trump’s efforts to ratfuck and obstruct the 2020 election, Turley’s own supporting role may receive more attention than it has so far.

It’s still quite intriguing that Turley wrote an op-ed, Could Robert Mueller actually be investigating Ukrainian collusion? (The Hill, Feb 21, 2019) just after Rudy Giuliani met with Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko in Poland, but just before The Hill’s John Solomon interviewed Ukraine’s prosecutor general Yuriy Lutsenko for Hill.TV during which Lutsenko made a false claim about U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch as part of a character assassination operation.

Such timely prescience coincidentally mirroring a Russian active measure reeks of bullshit. One might wonder if Turley’s, Giuliani’s, and Solomon’s 2019 phone records have a few overlaps.

~ 1 ~

And then there’s this bullshit which may be on another level altogether – Tucker Carlson’s disseminating a complete fabrication of another reality intended to obscure the attempted overthrow of the U.S. government.

Sadly, it’s playing on televisions across military facilities and likely some federal offices, too.

It’d be nice if instead Carlson and the rest of Fox News’ toxic crap our federally-owned televisions were distributing our own content produced by the U.S. Agency for Global Media since its mission is to “inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy.”

Clearly it’s not Carlson’s or the Murdochs’ or News Corp’s mission to encourage freedom and democracy when they’re whitewashing insurrection and sedition. Their mission instead is flooding the zone with bullshit.

~ 0 ~

What’s the most egregious bullshit you’ve seen this week? Share in comments.

105 replies
  1. Bobby Gladd says:

    1. The judge in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial forbidding prosecutors from referring to those shot and killed as “victims“ while permitting the defense to characterize them as “rioters, looters, or arsonists.”

    2. The Racine, Wisconsin sheriff, for channeling his inner Mike Lindell, holding a press conference claiming to “prove” massive voter fraud in the 2020 election.

    • bmaz says:

      Courts ordering the prosecution not to refer to victims as “victims” is not everyday, but not unusual at all either, because it connotes that a crime was committed on them when only the evidence should do that. Most judges would also curb how other individuals are referred to. But the first part really is not what people are making it out to be.

      Can’t speak for the Racine guy.

        • bmaz says:

          If the people shot are victims, what are they victims of?? Why not just go ahead and call the defendant “the guilty”? Why even have a trial? Off with his head because “victims”!

          • CO says:

            It seem not inconceivable that one could be a victim, and the defendant is still a “suspect”. Kinda why trials are held. More troubling, perhaps is the defense planning to connote the deceased as looters

            • Paul Verby says:

              It is my understanding that the Judge ruled that the defense could not refer to the dec’ds as looters etc. EXCEPT in their closing arguments, and then ONLY if they had produced evidence of such conduct during the trial. This is significantly different from what has been loosely portrayed online.

          • Peterr says:

            Lead poisoning?

            I get what you are saying, bmaz, but let’s not pretend two people aren’t dead because Rittenhouse repeatedly pulled a trigger. They might be victims of a tragic accident, misguided teenage angst, a fear-driven militia mindset, or someone doing some premeditated hunting of alleged Antifa rioters. Whatever led Rittenhouse to pull the trigger remains to be determined, but make no mistake: two people are dead as a direct result of his actions.

            If I’m the lawyer and can’t refer to them as victims, I sure as hell will be making multiple references to “the deceased.”

              • Peterr says:

                I disagree.

                I can see not using “victim” in cases like the Bill Cosby trial, where the question of someone being harmed is part and parcel of the proceedings. If the sex was consensual, there is no victim. In this case, however, you’ve got two dead bodies that everyone agrees became dead because Rittenhouse pulled the trigger. There is no conceivable set of circumstances in which you can say these folks are not victims of something. For the judge to say otherwise is appalling.

                I envision an opening statement something like this:

                Joseph Rosenbaum is dead.
                Anthony Huber is dead.
                You will see video – disturbing video – of the gun shots that killed them.
                And on that video, you will see Kyle Rittenhouse firing that gun.

                None of that is in dispute. Two people are dead, because Mr. Rittenhause shot them.

                The question you members of the jury will be asked to decide is simple: “Why?”

                What you will hear from the defense is all manner of possible justifications for his actions. Mr. Rittenhause is entitled to a vigorous defense, and I have no doubt that his legal team will give him one. But they cannot deny that Mr. Rosenbaum and Mr. Huber are dead, because their client drove from Illinois to Kenosha with an AR-15, pointed it at Mr. Rosenbaum and Mr. Huber, and pulled the trigger.

                It is our job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did so, not accidentally or in self-defense, but intending to cause harm. And that is exactly what we will show you as this trial unfolds. . . .

                • timbo says:

                  Yep. Not sure why the judge isn’t interested in thinking about the illegal transport by a minor of weapons across statelines that ended up with two dead folks on the street during a supposed curfew…

          • boba says:

            The deceased is a victim and the person on trial is the alleged perpetrator. Seems pretty clear to me why we have a trial, to determine if the allegations are correct.

            • bmaz says:

              This is absolute rubbish.The accused is either Mr. Smith or “the defendant”. Not all judges hold that deceased or others injured should not be called “victim” but many do. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with those who do and the trials work just fine. The caterwauling over this nonsense is just ridiculous. It is meaningless.

              • boba says:

                I was pointing out the definition of victim fits here and reasonable people (Peterr for one) can discern how that term is being used. Apparently I stumbled into a foolish consistency within the law.

        • Nord Dakota says:

          This judge is reported to deny the use of “victim” in all trials. Not sure about the “looter” etc part although I suppose if speaking to Kyle’s state of mind???

      • Bobby Gladd says:


        I watched all 15 days of the George Floyd murder trial. I was struck by the extent to which the judge controlled the language used by both the prosecution and defense, right down to individual words. Repeatedly cutting them off and making them restate things.

        The Racine Wisconsin sheriff held this breathless news conference in which he alleged massive statewide election fraud. The only thing he offered up, though, was some vague crap about some nursing home residents who “voted“ despite being characterized as “incompetent.“ (Absent any official, legal diagnoses of such.) It was pretty lame.

        • Leoghann says:

          So he’s saying that at least 20,683 nursing home residents across the state were so grossly incompetent that they voted for Biden, when they meant to vote for Trump, but not a single one made the reverse error? That’s hilarious. He must be facing a difficult reelection.

    • noromo says:

      What I haven’t seen mentioned in this sub-thread is that Rittenhouse is claiming self-defense. In other words, he is the “victim,” and shot those people to protect himself. IANAL, and I don’t necessarily agree, but I understand the narrow point the judge is making.

      • Peterr says:

        The deceased may be the victims of criminal behavior or the victims of non-criminal behavior. Either way, they are still dead, and calling them victims merely recognizes this fact. The judge is splitting hairs that in this case do not merit such splitting.

        • bmaz says:

          Complete and total horseshit, they do NOT have to be called “victims”. This is fucking tiring.

          And, by. the way, since no one here making a stink about this nonsense, nor many on Twitter, the defense does not get to willy nilly call the two deceased and one wounded “rioters,” “looters” and “arsonists” to refer to those men. No, his order, which very may be modified to be more restrictive when the parties have rested, says only that they can use those term only in closing, and only if the evidence in the evidentiary portion of the case firmly supports it. So, this is all a non-issue and a red herring. This is still an idiotic discussion and Schroders order nis not critical in any to the trial presentation.

          • Peterr says:

            Very well.

            But just because the judge refuses to allow them to be called victims does not mean that they are not victims. They damn well are, and if the court cannot recognize that fact and refuses to allow anyone to mention that fact, it does not encourage respect for the court.

            And that ought to worry both prosecutors and defense attorneys, in this and every courtroom.

            • bmaz says:

              It does not worry me in the least, and while occasionally prosecutors will publicly whine about it (as Binger did on the record in Rittenhouse), privately, if they really do many trials, they will acknowledge it is not really a problem, and the exclusion of the same is completely consistent with Rule 403, especially in claimed self defense cases. It is of no real moment whatsoever.

              • Peterr says:

                No real moment whatsoever? Please. The import here is how the general public views the courts, which matters as much as the the verdicts the juries render.

                When the public does not respect the courts, protests and violence are the inevitable result.

                • bmaz says:

                  No. None. This is completely ginned up horse manure by people that don’t know anything. Sorry, but that is the truth. You are simply wrong for relentlessly hammering this idiocy. You do not know, are pulling shit out of the uninformed internet’s reactionary ass and are simply wrong. “Victim” my ass, they can be a “victim” after there is a conviction. This is just an insane argument. I am sick of this useless argument, and am done with it.

                  • Peterr says:

                    People can be a victim long before a court acknowledged that fact.

                    I am not a lawyer, to know how things are handled within the bounds of the legal system. But I know a helluva lot about how things are received in the wider world. There is a lot more connection between the narrow world of the trial court and the ordinary walking-down-the-street world than you seem to recognize.

                    If you think that someone is only a victim post-conviction, that’s pretty sad. The rest of the world can see victims long before a judge says “Hey, look at that – there’s a victim lying on the ground bleeding to death over there.”

                    • Epicurus says:

                      A good defense attorney and a good judge will fight tooth and nail to prevent what each believes is a bias toward a defendant. A word has many different meanings and so “victim” for a defense attorney, and some judges, is a code red for subliminally establishing a predetermined, causal relationship in the minds of the jurors that works against the defendant. Because we are talking about a triaI here I imagine bmaz is reverting to his best defense attorney and non-prejudicial instincts. I sincerely doubt bmaz thinks, as a personal philosophy, that someone is only a “victim” post-conviction.

                    • hollywood says:

                      By not permitting the prosecution to refer to the deceased as victims, he eliminates one possible ground of appeal by Rittenhouse.
                      The judge doesn’t want to hear the case twice.

                  • Bobby Gladd says:

                    Dug out my Black’s Law Dictionary.

                    “Victim: a person harmed by a crime, tort, or other wrong.” Pg. 1561

                    You’re right. I shoulda gone upstairs and dragged that out first, after I heard that news report. The legal connotation is necessarily more narrowly focused than the general usage.

          • Rugger9 says:

            The timing is what worries me, since the jury hasn’t been seated much less sequestered. The statements that did make it into the press run a high risk of tainting the jury pool into thinking that the dead were actually rioters. Once the first thought is in anyone’s mind it takes a lot of effort to correct it to the facts.

            • Epicurus says:

              The jury selection process would have such a direct question to potential jurors. They can lie, of course, for which there is no real recourse for the defense and defendant unless it can be proven. I believe most people would answer honestly. Once one is sitting in the jury box and answering such questions, the zeitgeist of the juror selection process is quite powerful (at least as I have observed in juries of which I have been a member).

  2. MB says:

    Upcoming egregious bullshit: I hear tell that despite Mark Meadows’ lawyer being in contact with the 1/6 committee lawyers, that they are now arriving at the conclusion that such contact has been for the purposes of time-wasting only and that they will soon have to decide whether to file criminal contempt against Meadows now.

    Speaking of which, when will the DOJ give a thumbs up/down on Bannon’s contempt referral? I do believe it’s been over a week since the referral went down at this point.

    For comparative purposes, the Reagan DOJ in 1982 returned a criminal contempt indictment against Anne Gorsuch, then head of the EPA (and yes, Neil’s ma), 9 days after referral from Congress…

    • P J Evans says:

      They certified Bannon’s contempt referral this week. So not long, and I’m sure DOJ has a lot of other stuff they’re dealing with.

  3. OldTulsaDude says:

    12,000 Air Force personnel refusing the vaccine mandate.

    Dishonorable discharge for all seems in order.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Perhaps the USAF could treat its employees who disobey an order to become vaccinated against a deadly virus the same way its Academy treats agnostics and atheists. At the Academy, being either of those things is like disobeying an order from God, even though I don’t think She would agree with that view.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Or perhaps the USAF could end its defacto demand that academy students demonstrate allegiance to its fundamentalist version of christianity, and then deal with 12,000 staff who disobey orders in accordance with the UCMJ.

        • Rugger9 says:

          Mikey Weinstein of the MRFF has the USAFA as a frequent and deserved target, so nothing new there and MRFF has been quite successful in getting the USAFA to recall they represent all of America not just the Dominionist fundies in the cases they’ve brought.

          For enlisted:
          Dishonorable Discharges (DDs) require a general court martial (GCM), and disobeying an order by itself doesn’t usually rise to the level of significance for a DD (desertion and the like do).

          Bad Conduct Discharges (BCDs or the “Big Chicken Dinner”) usually will come out of a GCM as well, typically for repeated drug test failures or Unauthorized Absences (UAs). I would expect many of our J6 active duty enlisted will end up here.

          Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharges are for lesser issues (maybe one UA or one failed drug test. I would suspect that if our anti-vaxx “heroes” were militant on their social media they’ll get this one, otherwise it will be:

          General Discharge under Honorable Conditions which is where misfits (i.e. conscientious objectors, homosexuals before the military wised up, etc.) will go.

          Honorable Discharges are not likely. The consequences for VA benefits depend upon the type of discharge and the discharge type is recorded on the DD 214 discharge form.

          For officers, the honorable discharge is usually noted (like mine is) unless the officer is Dismissed which functions like a DD noted above.

    • madwand says:

      Well if the government follows the Reagan precedent they will discharge the lot of them and good riddance for failure to follow orders. Will it create some angst and possible some security issues, perhaps depending on where these misfits are working. When Reagan fired the controllers it was the devil be dammed, and pilots soon realized that the guy on the other side of the radio didn’t know WTF he was doing. The situation took a couple of years to even out.

  4. drouse says:

    The Sci-Fi novel that keeps coming to my mind is “The Mote in God’s Eye” by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. I keep wondering if we are experiencing our first Crazy Eddie event.

    • Silly but True says:

      The fascinating thing about Pournelle is he was hooked into the military-industrial complex, 1950s through 1980s.

      Pournelle created the concept for Project Thor while working in operations research at Boeing in the 1950s before becoming a science-fiction writer.

      Project Thor was an idea for a weapons system that launches telephone pole-sized kinetic projectiles made from tungsten from Earth’s orbit to damage targets on the ground.

      • Ken Muldrew says:

        Pournelle also had the damndest time trying to get his computer to work throughout the entire decade of the 80s and well into the 90s. He wrote a monthly column in Byte magazine about how he couldn’t get anything to work but famous tech people would drop by and help him out and everything would be OK for a day or so, then he would do something foolish and wreck everything all over again.

        • P J Evans says:

          He probably enjoyed schmoozing with them – when he could shut up and listen to them. He was a good raconteur, though. (My father, who was about the same age, had no such trouble with his. He’d call up the software houses, instead, and he was running a virtual disk in the early 90s, using batch commands. Beta-tested one edition of Norton Utilities.)

    • P J Evans says:

      I keep thinking of the “paid avoidance areas” in “Shockwave Rider” by John Brunner, where people get tax breaks for living in designated areas that do without some stuff.

  5. may says:

    Cas R Sunstein

    published 2021
    in the United States of America
    Oxford University Press
    198 Madison Avenue, New York. NY 10016.

    printed by LSC Communications,
    United States of America

    ISBN 9780197545119 (hardback)

  6. Stuart Dahlquist says:

    I agree with everything above but wanted to add:
    NPR when speaking of Facebook has always stated that ‘FB is a contributor to NPR’. As of this morning that statement changed;’FB was a contributor to NPR’.
    In some way I was pleased to hear this.

  7. TooLoose Letruck says:

    I happened to come across the trailer for Tucker’s upcoming ‘documentary’ Patriot Purge last night and watched it, and by the time it ended I was so angry that I was damned near shaking… I’m at a loss for words to truly convey how disgusting and infuriating I found it.

    The sheer f’in gall, to cobble that crap together and call it an insightful look at what’s happening in this country… just how empty of a hole do you have to be, to create a piece of crap like that and then try to pass it off as ‘serious journalism’?

  8. DrFunguy says:

    An open letter/petition from some RCMP calling vaccine mandates unconstitutional in Canada and possibly in violation of the Nuremberg principles. They also pile up a heap of BS about the ‘under reported’ fatalities from the vaccines.
    I have a couple of vaccine hesitant friends who point this in support of their reluctance to contribute to basic public health measures. It makes me sad.

    • Rayne says:

      Hard to believe Canada’s constitution is an automatic suicide pact any more than the US constitution.

      As for the claim vaccine mandates violate the Nuremberg principles: government’s insistence on saving as many of its citizens and residents as possible is hardly murder, extermination, enslavement, or persecution based on religion, politics, race/ethnicity, in the furtherance of a crime against peace.

      I swear these morons who can’t argue their way out of a wet paper bag make the case they should be allowed to die to preserve the general welfare of the state going forward, but they’d be a risk to immunocompromised and children, a pool for development of new and more aggressive SARS-CoV-2 strains, and a burden on the rest of the state until they leave the planet.

      • DrFunguy says:

        Mounties for Freedom claim that because the vaccines are “experimental “, and people are being “forced“ to take them, it amounts to forced participation in experiments without informed consent.
        Mounties for freedom apparently are unfamiliar with the concept of irony. Since the RCMP was responsible for kidnapping First Nations children who were _actually_ subjected to non-consensual experimentation on human nutrition by the Red Cross.
        I am at a loss as to how to engage with my friend, Mr. M, on this. Back in August when we discussed vaccination he said “I know it changes your DNA”; I was unable to dissuade him.
        My friend is a skilled carpenter and musician (professional level); I have an earned a PhD in a biological science (I think you can guess my area of expertise ;-) ), and a record of peer-reviewed publications in respectable journals. But he is immune to rational argument on this; pointing out logical fallacies does no good when one’s mind is made up.

        • Rayne says:

          Oh yeah, that little First Nations caveat. Mr. M didn’t point out his argument relying on the Nuremberg principles applies only to whites. Wonder where it says in Canada’s constitution that First Nations are to be excluded from protections against violations of their human rights.

          Dude needs to be deprogrammed. Our entire western society needs to be deprogrammed. If only there was a greater consciousness of this necessity, a means for doing so at scale, and the political will to do so.

        • P J Evans says:

          EUA doesn’t mean “experimental use” – that’s “emergency use”. The experiment is the testing, and the vaxes are well past that stage.

            • Savage Librarian says:

              Yes, it is. Thanks for that. And focused as I am on words, I was particularly struck by Foglia’s comment, “Italy “metabolized” fascism too quickly, and without fully addressing the sentiments that made it vulnerable….”

              I wonder if anyone else out there had the reaction to the word, “metabolized” that I did. My mind immediately thought about Facebook’s rebranding to Meta.

              • Ginevra diBenci says:

                Right with you, SL, on *words,* even in this case a singular verb, getting us closer to the truth. I tried to comment on your Chris Rufo poem; site wouldn’t let me, but since I think there’s a connection, here it is:

                All I can think of after reading this is “Jim 180-proof Crow.” I’ll admit the alcohol-content number varies (scansion reasons), but after the Rufo-infused triumph in yesterday’s elections, I think this country has metabolized a fermented version of fascism, gotten drunk on a vat of moonshine with a snake oil chaser.

                Thank you for always reminding me to create something from the wreckage. Or at least try.

        • DrFunguy says:

          My Covid truth sandwich (h/t Rayne)
          Despite the fact that ICU’s remain overflowing with coronavirus patients, thereby denying medical resources to others in urgent need, causing needless death and misery, there are those continuing to promote all kinds of misinformation regarding the vaccines. While (some of) these groups may be well-intentioned and have feel good names like Mounties for Freedom and Canadian Covid are, they are causing a lot of confusion and damage.
          Myths I have recently encountered include:
          They’re not really vaccines, because definitions recently changed to allow for them.
          They’re experimental.
          Vaccine mandates are unconstitutional.
          Vaccines have high numbers of serious side effects.
          The truth is that:
          They really are vaccines (no scare quotes required); definitions change as technology/science evolve.
          The experimental phase for these vaccines ended over nine months ago and they continue to show a high degree of safety.
          We have mandates for quite a few childhood vaccines so they are clearly allowed under Canadian law.
          Claims of high rates of serious side effects result from misleading and or flawed analyses.

        • Lulymay says:

          As someone who has a number of ancestors – going back to 1884 when the Northwest Mounted Police were created, I would have to say that they now have more than their share of “experimental” recruits roaming the highways these days in Canada.

    • Nord Dakota says:

      Same kind of people claims masks are violations of Nuremburg Code.

      I live where it gets really cold in the winter. When they invented 3M masks everyone bought them to have their kids wear when it was below zero.

      Everyone’s faces get wrapped up all winter long, and we don’t call it medical treatment, it’s called frostbite prevention

    • P J Evans says:

      Books about growing up, books about Roe v Wade, history books that aren’t all white people, one that’s a list of books itself: books that they should have in libraries.

    • Leoghann says:

      I am a native of the original bastion of conservatism in Texas, which voted Republican even in the Fifties and Sixties (Goldwater won in both Midland and Ector Counties, as well as several surrounding rural ones). But my public education was actually quite liberal and advanced. Our school libraries, even in the Sixties, contained many very progressive titles. I still subscribe to the local paper, and was sad to see that the local school districts had each gotten a “letter of concern” from the Abbottreich, sent to all districts that counted some of the forbidden volumes in their school library collections. I say sad–it seriously pisses me off.

  9. OldTulsaDude says:

    It occurs to me that at this point in time anyone who is donating to a GOP election fund is doing so in full knowledge that the contribution is for the purpose of destroying liberal democracy.

  10. mospeck says:

    Rayne, did I hear you correct in that you just cleared us to diatribe? Roger Houston, we are go for rant. After all, it’s Halloween, our celebration of the damned and the doomed :)
    btw the Halloween wapo this AM sure scared the hell out of me. But being in NY figure I’d get myself arrested for trick or treating in a Squid Game suit, so I’m going in an Eastman one. But then it’s all just in good fun for Halloween. Sadly the Old Repub, the old girl, she’s just not in a good place, not gonna last forever (well, maybe–if the lawyers were faster). So then, what’s wrong with the many worlds interpretation? There’s a big wide beautiful U out there. And soon you’ll be able to book at the 2030 Mars Hilton for Saturn cruises, moons of Jupiter, outer rim and lots of other great places. But this old place will for sure be remembered with love and respect as Homeworld—similar to the Neanderthals, for them being an essential irrevocable 3 pct. part of our genome (don’t know about you, but they are at least 5 of mine and maybe 10 for bmaz). So it’s just bad luck if Edward G pulls the jack of diamonds and you end up stuck on this rock, get PKD black-listed as a special and unable to emigrate to the off world colonies. Sure seems like we’re in hard luck times
    But we gotta trust in them kids, because a lot of them get it. Introspective they are.

  11. Leoghann says:

    I heartily agree with all the examples. I even knew of the speech from the Racine County, Wisconsin, sheriff, from an outraged friend who lives there. Here in Arizona, like it or not, we’re still dealing with the fucking CyberNinjas. The not-audit they agreed to do is done, but they and their wingnut supporters claim they have more to do. Their reports have not been received by Maricopa County. They have not been received by the body that hired them, the State Senate–not on the original due date, nor on the extended due date, nor on the recent ordered deadline. Their allies in the senate are notably quiet, and a little touchy. Of course, the audit process blew through the $150K paid by the senate within the first week. The considerably greater funds they’ve soaked up have been donated. The CyberNinja “executives” (there must be 3 by now) have no comment. They haven’t even responded to threats of criminal charges. It appears they have adopted the policy of Bartleby.

  12. AlaskaReader says:

    A nearby Alaska city council denied the city library a grant approval for a measly 1500 dollars because some council members wished to have pre-approval over which books were possibly going to be purchased.

    The library was then flooded with donations, nearly 15,000 dollars worth.

    Doesn’t explain how those city council members ever got elected, but it does show that their agenda isn’t well received by the public.

  13. hollywood says:

    After pooh-poohing the claims of the contacts between the Trump organization and Alfa Bank, I wonder what rationalization Turley will come up with now that the Durham indictment of Sussman appears to confirm those repeated contacts.

  14. Savage Librarian says:

    Met a Man

    Just when we tried to address the curse
    we met a man in the Zuckerverse,
    Call the doctor, call the nurse,
    His psyche’s foaming & getting worse
    than someone in the Tuckerverse.

    • mospeck says:

      “Yesterday, upon the stair,
      I met a man who wasn’t there
      He wasn’t there again today
      I wish, I wish he’d go away..”
      –WH Mearns, back in 1899 anticipated our troubles 120 years on.

    • Eureka says:

      Hello, yes. And after a point I felt reeeely really bad for the Kittehs. They were so determined that they’d get their first win on Halloween ahead of their bye. I’m pleased/relieved coaches called good games on both sides of the ball. We’ll see what happens next week.

      As to Thurs, hope K1’s OK. And much like AJ Green I did not see that end coming, holy ish! Eagles legend Za— Rasul Douglas!


    • Eureka says:

      Oh and how could I forget the digestif of Wentz not only Wentzing but going Full Ben Simmons (shooting with the wrong hand). [I can’t believe no one has made this observation, or hadn’t a/o when I was last clicking around — slam dunk material sitting right there, smh.]

  15. Leoghann says:

    I’ll see Jenny’s Josh Hawley and add Rick Santorum. He’s joined Newsmax as their senior political analyst (heavy on the anal part, but I thought that was the orange guy). Newsmax descrbes Santorum as “one of the most articulate and candid political analysts in media today,” while he brags on his ”common-sense, blue-collar conservative voice.”

    Also, there’s a throng of Qberts gathered in Dallas at Dealey Plaza today, awaiting JFK Jr.’s appearance on the grassy knoll with a special message. No shit.

    • Leoghann says:

      Update: The Qberts were apparently expecting to see JFK, Jr.’s dad as well. If the assassination was indeed a false flag, the 104 year old ex-President, who had a seriously bad back sixty years ago and accompanying heavy use of pain killers, would be in pretty bad shape by now.

Comments are closed.