THINGS FALL APART: Rayshard Brooks fell asleep in his car!

FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 2020

Nicolle Wallace finds her "assassin:"
Yesterday afternoon, we just had to turn it off.

We were watching Deadline White House. Nicolle Wallace and two guests were crafting an instant novel.

In this case, the instant novel concerned Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old who shot and killed two people in Kenosha on Tuesday night.

Rittenhouse has been arrested. His case will proceed from there. It will of course involve his right to mount a defense for his actions. For ourselves, we wish his mother had kept him home that night.

This very young person's case will proceed from here. But Wallace and a pair of guests were crafting an instant novel.

The most horrible part of the thing is this—they almost surely believed the various things they said. But their conduct came from so close to the land of The Crazy that we just had to turn the show off.

The Crazy has been on wide display in the past few years. It's on display in the QAnon movement. It's on display in the crazy way Donald J. Trump has reacted to the ongoing pandemic.

Unfortunately, a first cousin to The Crazy was put on display when Wallace, a former Bush hack who our needy tribe has adopted, joined her guests in crafting yesterday's novel.

The story they told was very scary. It was also dumb beyond compare—deeply dumb and all-too-human.

In this morning's New York Times, David Brooks gives a pretty good description of what we saw on yesterday's program. He starts by discussing "mean world syndrome," which he describes in the manner shown:
BROOKS (8/28/20): Trump family values are mean world values. Mean world syndrome was a concept conceived in the 1970s by the communications professor George Gerbner. His idea was that people who see relentless violence on television begin to perceive the world as being more dangerous than it really is.
With that definition of mean world syndrome, Brooks described the overall state of play as our election draws near:
BROOKS: Yes, there have been disgraceful scenes of far left physical and verbal brutality, which get magnified on Twitter. The far bigger threat, however, is that we have a president too busy fighting a culture war to respond to a pandemic and an economic crisis, or even to perform basic governance. What part of 180,000 coronavirus dead does Donald Trump not understand?

The larger threat is that we’re caught in a polarization cascade. Mean world fanatics—on the left and right—are playing a mutually beneficial game.
Trumpian chaos justifies and magnifies the woke mobs on the left. Woke mobs magnify and justify Trumpian authoritarianism on the right.

The upshot of the mean world war is the obliteration of normal politics, the hollowing out of the center and the degradation of public morality. Under the cover of this souped-up, screw-or-be-screwed mentality, norms are eviscerated, truth is massacred, bigotry is justified and politics turns into a struggle to culturally obliterate the other side.
In other words, things fall apart. In our view, things have badly fallen apart even Over Here, within our own self-impressed tribe.

Let's start by answering Brooks' question: "What part of 180,000 coronavirus dead does Donald Trump not understand?"

That question is easily answered. The chances are good that Donald J. Trump understand no part of 180,000 deaths. In our view, the chances are good that Donald J. Trump is some version of a sociopath, though Brooks and Wallace and her two guests have agreed—it's a corporate arrangement—that this obvious possibility must never be discussed.

Donald Trump seems to be deeply disordered. On a psychiatric basis, it may actually be that he possesses nothing resembling a conscience, and no moral feeling at all.

It may be that Trump has no moral capacity. This brings us back to what we saw as Wallace composed her novel.

Back in the day, Wallace used her substantial skills to let Bush conduct his deadly war in Iraq. She helped him get reelected by arranging to have same-sex marriage prohibitions on various state ballots, thus driving conservative turnout.

This is the person our needy party now listens to as our own. Yesterday, she was using her demagogic skills to craft a novel our tribe would like.

Yesterday, watching that show, we saw a bit of the "polarization cascade" to which Brooks refers. We also saw prehuman tribal loathing of others, wherever such others can be found.

Our team is deeply sunk in this mess. We don't see how it ends well. Things have fallen apart Over Here. Our societal failure isn't restricted to The Crazy afflicting the other side.

What we saw yesterday was just ginormously dumb. (In certain respects, it was vile.) When we surrender to tribal war, every ounce of our story-telling must craft The Perfect Tale. The principle here is very simple:

As tribal beings, we need to tell ourselves the stories in which our tribe is perfectly good.

We're going to leave it here for today. In our view, the overview stated by Brooks does make an excellent point. What we saw on our TV machine yesterday was gruesome beyond compare.

144 comments:

  1. "On a psychiatric basis, it may actually be that he possesses nothing resembling a conscience, and no moral feeling at all."

    Whoa, how horrible, dear Bob.

    Have you now completed your quota of Orange Man Bad dembottery this week, my dear?

    We hope you have not, dear Bob. We've always enjoyed your vivid descriptions of Our Beloved Commander burning 'em little kittens alive, and we would like to read more of that. Please oblige, dear Bob.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ma0 ma0 * ,!, ,!,

      Delete
    2. I gave a Putin a rusty trombone while Jerry Falwell JR. Watched

      Delete
    3. Hello viewers around the Globe, I was despondent because i had a very small penis, about 2.5 inches soft and 4 inches hard not nice enough to satisfy a woman, i have been in so many relationship, but cut off because of my situation, i have used so many product which doctors for me, but none could offer me the help i searched for. i saw some few comments on the INTERNET about this specialist called Dr,OLU and decided to contact him on his email: Drolusolutinthome@gmail.com) so I decided to give his herbal product a try. i emailed him and he got back to me, he gave me some comforting words with his herbal pills for Penis Enlargement, Within 3 week of it, i began to feel the enlargement was surprised when she said that she is satisfied with my sex and i have got a large penis. Am so happy, thanks to Dr OLU I also learn that Dr OLU also help with Breast Enlargement Hips and Bums Enlargement etc.. If you are in any situation with a little Penis, weak ejaculation, small breast_hips_bums do get to Dr OLU now for help on his email (Drolusolutionhome@gmail.com) or add him on whatsapp line +2348140654426 












































      Hello viewers around the Globe, I was despondent because i had a very small penis, about 2.5 inches soft and 4 inches hard not nice enough to satisfy a woman, i have been in so many relationship, but cut off because of my situation, i have used so many product which doctors for me, but none could offer me the help i searched for. i saw some few comments on the INTERNET about this specialist called Dr,OLU and decided to contact him on his email: Drolusolutinthome@gmail.com) so I decided to give his herbal product a try. i emailed him and he got back to me, he gave me some comforting words with his herbal pills for Penis Enlargement, Within 3 week of it, i began to feel the enlargement was surprised when she said that she is satisfied with my sex and i have got a large penis. Am so happy, thanks to Dr OLU I also learn that Dr OLU also help with Breast Enlargement Hips and Bums Enlargement etc.. If you are in any situation with a little Penis, weak ejaculation, small breast_hips_bums do get to Dr OLU now for help on his email (Drolusolutionhome@gmail.com) or add him on whatsapp line +2348140654426 

      Delete

    4. LOTTO, lottery,jackpot.
      Hello all my viewers, I am very happy for sharing this great testimonies,The best thing that has ever happened in my life is how I win the lottery euro million mega jackpot. I am a Woman who believe that one day I will win the lottery. finally my dreams came through when I email believelovespelltemple@gmail.com and tell him I need the lottery numbers. I have spend so much money on ticket just to make sure I win. But I never know that winning was so easy until the day I meant the spell caster online which so many people has talked about that he is very great in casting lottery spell, . so I decide to give it a try.I contacted this great Dr Believe and he did a spell and he gave me the winning lottery numbers. But believe me when the draws were out I was among winners. I win 30,000 million Dollar. Dr Believe truly you are the best, all thanks to you forever



























































      LOTTO, lottery,jackpot.
      Hello all my viewers, I am very happy for sharing this great testimonies,The best thing that has ever happened in my life is how I win the lottery euro million mega jackpot. I am a Woman who believe that one day I will win the lottery. finally my dreams came through when I email believelovespelltemple@gmail.com and tell him I need the lottery numbers. I have spend so much money on ticket just to make sure I win. But I never know that winning was so easy until the day I meant the spell caster online which so many people has talked about that he is very great in casting lottery spell, . so I decide to give it a try.I contacted this great Dr Believe and he did a spell and he gave me the winning lottery numbers. But believe me when the draws were out I was among winners. I win 30,000 million Dollar. Dr Believe truly you are the best, all thanks to you forever

      Delete
  2. Here’s Sen. and Mrs. Rand Paul trying to leave the convention.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1299338647343378440?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1299338647343378440%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Face.mu.nu%2F

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good boy white supremacist hooman earn walk with no leash and protect bitch from bad hoomans with no purpose.

      Delete
    2. You need to cut Rand Paul some slack. He was attacked by his own nextdoor neighbor and thus may be a little confused about who is dangerous and who is not.

      Delete
    3. “ Good boy white supremacist hooman earn walk with no leash and protect bitch from bad hoomans with no purpose.”

      I couldn’t have said it better myself...

      Delete
    4. Appreciate that you are open about your racism, that is mighty white of you...

      Delete
    5. Actually, I’m open to you making fun of me.

      Delete
    6. Apparently you can neutralize criticism by admitting you are a horrible person. In your face racism is the new black.

      Clinton: blowjob outside your marriage is ok
      Trump: hate outside your race is ok

      Delete
    7. You prove it.

      Delete
    8. It's a casual hobby, when I am bored with knitting. Were my actual job so easy!

      Delete
    9. Here’s Sen. and Mrs. Rand Paul trying to leave the convention.

      Amazing that the Senator from the House of Paul was able to quickly gather a police cordon escorting him from the WH all the way to his hotel. Very resourceful of him. The only violence I saw was one of the armored DC police using his weapon as a club to attack a protestor.

      I noticed none of the protestors yelling at him were armed. What's wrong with them, don't they watch how right wingers do it when they want to invade State Legislative Houses? What a bunch of pikers.

      This is still America, Dixie. Citizens have the right to yell at elected representatives, don't you think?

      Delete
    10. Thanks for the link, Cecilia. I hadn't seen it before. It's horrifying.

      Delete
    11. Here’s another.

      https://twitter.com/nieto_phillip/status/1299207662043828224?s=20

      Delete
    12. mm, that was more than yelling.

      It is ironic too because Paul had written legislation that limits No Knock raids.

      Delete
    13. David, the video is down a bit in that link.

      Couple walking from the convention, Woman in a red dress.

      Delete
    14. https://mobile.twitter.com/KarluskaP/status/1299350068601016322

      Delete
    15. Republicans are horrified by yelling, but beating up and shooting and putting in the hospital and killing protestors is just fine.

      Republicans have no moral compass.

      Delete
    16. I hadn't seen it before. It's horrifying. That Rand Paul is a U.S. Senator.

      Delete
    17. Poor Dixie, she spent half the day yesterday scouring every YouTube version of the great march of Senator Ayn Rand, crawling his way through the street rabble who had the temerity to shout mean and nasty words at him as he slowly moved surrounded by a police cordon, from the criminal WH which was using our House in violation of the Hatch Act to host his nomination.

      Yes, Senator Ayn Rand was one of the Chosen few given the honor and privilege to attend the ceremony and sit on our White House lawn while watching the Acting President shit in our faces and laugh at the laws that apply to mere commoners, not the elite such as Senator Ayn Rand.


      Cecilia ever searching for evidence to prove that she should be aggrieved once again, for you see she belongs to the Church of the Perpetually Aggrieved.

      Delete
    18. Here’s you another, mm. You’ll like this one and you’re likely to see it again and again in the future.

      A Republican campaign ad of a joyful and exuberant lady! Coming to tv near you!

      https://twitter.com/yhazony/status/1299231377494343680?s=20

      sheesh.

      Delete
    19. I hear gun sales are 72% up, compared to the same period last year.

      If liberal-hitlerian zombies demand a civil war, then, I guess, it'll happen.

      Delete
    20. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uJUpQHXFtLI

      Delete
    21. It's ok, Dixie, Senator Ayn Rand, champion Libertarian is calling on the FBI to investigate citizens exercising their 1st Amendment rights. He'll has his satisfaction.

      Good job ignoring any points I tried to address. Would you like me to post YouTube links to some interesting Biden campaign commercials?

      Delete
    22. You can post them and I will watch them.

      Perhaps a Biden ad could use the footage of the Pauls leaving the convention, with a dire sounding voiceover about how Sen. Paul wishes to abridge the civil rights of the people pushing toward him.

      They could do that ominous clanging sound when the police officer stumbles when pushed by the crowd as he brutalizes the mob by distancing it from the Pauls.



      Delete
    23. Rand Paul (the best US politician by far) walking the streets of DC is A FORM OF WHITE SUPREMACY.

      Delete
    24. Ha ha ha,
      You'd have to be a brainded Dembot zombies to think the GOP is anything more than a criminal enterprise.

      Delete
    25. It's ok, Dixie, Senator Ayn Rand, champion Libertarian, is calling on the FBI to investigate citizens exercising their 1st Amendment rights. He'll has his satisfaction.

      https://youtu.be/LO-guCZ8G64

      Enjoy!

      Bonus: Senator Ayn Rand is in it!

      Delete
    26. Rioting mob is concerned about 'rights'.

      Funny.

      Do you have more, dear Hillary? And please paste "Ayn Rand" at least 3 times next time.

      Delete
    27. Poor Chanel Miller couldn’t walk down a college town street without feeling like a victim of biology from catcalls and come-ons.

      Yet not being able to walk a block to your hotel without being physically impeded,
      ranted at, and threatened is just fine because it’s a protest.

      Take ten of your pals out to a local restaurant and try this stuff, mm. See how long it takes the police to haul you off.

      The way these protesters have more rights than you is because of their numbers. How’s that for oppression?

      Delete
    28. That's just beautiful, Dixie. Chanel Miller isn't an elected representative. Just a rape victim, so go ahead, take a cheap shot at her, you ghoul.

      “I truly believe this with every fiber of my being, had they gotten at us they would have gotten us to the ground, we might not have been killed, might just have been injured by being kicked in the head, or kicked in the stomach until we were senseless,” he said.

      Give me a fucking break.

      It's ok, Dixie, Senator Ayn Rand, champion Libertarian, is calling on the FBI to investigate citizens exercising their 1st Amendment rights. He'll has his satisfaction.

      Delete
    29. There aren't enough hours in a day for Libertarians to do anything but beg Daddy Government to bail them out.

      Delete
    30. mm, I’m aware that you don’t like Paul and think he and his wife deserved that treatment.

      Delete
    31. You're right, Cec, please continue wallowing in your victimization self-pity.

      Nobody laid a finger on them.

      Delete
    32. Rand Paul is trying to steal the "Snowflake of the Year" title from Kyle Rittenhouse.

      Delete
  3. "It's on display in the QAnon movement. It's on display in the crazy way Donald J. Trump has reacted to the ongoing pandemic."

    Eh, what's so Crazy about "the QAnon movement", dear Bob? Didn't you declare yourself that The Crazy Disappeared? When did it re-appear?

    And what is crazy about the "way Donald J. Trump has reacted to the ongoing pandemic"?

    He racist-ly banned the flights from China, and then from Europe; was that Crazy, in your expert opinion? What are you talking about, dear Bob?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kyle Rittenhouse is a psychopath that murdered two protestors in cold blood and Somerby's take is it will "involve his right to mount a defense for his actions".

    Interesting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. blogger is probably creaming in his pants over Rittenhouse, same as ZImmermann. His "We liberals" is some kind of signal - its not clear to whom.

      Delete
  5. From Brooks:

    “Mean world fanatics — on the left and right — are playing a mutually beneficial game. Trumpian chaos justifies and magnifies the woke mobs on the left. Woke mobs magnify and justify Trumpian authoritarianism on the right.”

    This is where I disagree with Brooks.

    First, he is slandering the mostly peaceful protesters as “mobs”.

    Second, he claims, later in his essay, that the “mean world” view leads to bigotry being justified. Ok. Think about that. The “woke mobs” are crying out against the very bigotry that Brooks implicitly condemns. His argument starts to sound “bothsidery.”

    Finally, the “mean world” view has its champion: Donald Trump in the White House, with the approval of vast swaths of the Republican Party, or what’s left of it.

    Democrats, Somerby’s “tribe”, have never chosen such a person as their standard bearer. Biden, as Brooks acknowledges, is eminently decent. That should tell Brooks something about the wrongheadedness of his “both sides do it” argument. But it doesn’t.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who told Nicole Wallace she could join our tribe?

      Delete
    2. Kinda like this, mh.

      https://twitter.com/calebjhull/status/1298832317033705472?s=21

      Delete
    3. Cecelia, Rand Paul said that the people who accosted him were Biden voters, and that they were paid to be there.

      In reality, those people were probably not Biden voters. Most just support BLM. Many may hate the Democratic Party, as so many Sanders voters did. Some of them may be anarchists. Some may well vote for Biden. Who knows? (Rand Paul does not.)

      The person or persons who set fire to buildings are criminals. It doesn’t matter what their ideology is or who they vote for. But let us know when one of them becomes President as a Democrat, or when a Democratic President urges and condones violence like Trump.

      You chide liberals here for demonizing Unite the Right confederate statue supporters as white supremacists, and yet you refuse to admit any nuance in the groups out on the streets protesting bigotry.

      Delete
    4. That kid went out looking to shoot someone.

      Delete
    5. “You chide liberals here for demonizing Unite the Right confederate statue supporters as white supremacists, and yet you refuse to admit any nuance in the groups out on the streets protesting bigotry.”

      I read you as ignoring or blaming the violence on your political contrarians. However, you make a good point here, mh.

      Delete
    6. The vast majority of the violence has been committed by cops, Trump supporters, Republicans, alt right groups, right wing extremists, and white supremacists.

      Leaked Documents Show Police Knew Far-Right Extremists Were the Real Threat at Protests, Not “Antifa”

      Violence by far right is among US’s most dangerous terrorist threats, study finds

      Cecelia, as much as one can decipher your language, you argue in bad faith.

      Delete
    7. For our Cecelia to argue in bad faith she'd have to present arguments that she didn't really believe in. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I think her situation is worse than that: like most Republicans, who merely walk amongst us as human, she actually believes in what she presents.

      Delete
    8. I will try to accept that, but it is hard to believe, it seems like willful denial and delusion at best.

      Delete
    9. Ordinary human beings are repelled by places like Clint, TX, where frightened children separated from their parents are imprisoned in conditions so filthy that the stench permeates the uniforms of their jailers so thoroughly that the townspeople avoid the guards.

      Ordinary people refuse to vote for, defend, endorse, or associate themselves with politicians who would institute a Clint, TX for the sole purpose of providing a deterrent for desperate people considering entering the country illegally.

      Ordinary people like you, prefer to believe that people like our Cecelia are enough like you that they would share your values but for their bad faith, willful denial, and delusion.

      But, alas, this is not so. They merely walk amongst us as human, knowingly accepting all the Clint, Texases as a reasonable outcome of their political choices.

      40% of your fellow citizens are perfectly happy with a grotesque fascism that doesn't even pretend anymore. Remember that the 2020 Republican Party didn't bother to write a platform for this election. Previous platforms outlined theoretical positions that were grotesquely cruel in practice. But the grotesquerie and cruelty are the point now, and the window dressing is superfluous.

      Don't make the mistake of thinking that people like our Cecelia don't understand where they are. They not only understand it, they revel in it.

      Delete
    10. Are they going to hold this snowflake's mother accountable, too?

      Delete
  6. From Political Wire:

    "“But so I think, I think it would be, I think it would be very, very, I think we’d have a very, very solid, we would continue what we’re doing, we’d solidify what we’ve done, and we have other things on our plate we want to get done.”

    — President Trump, in an interview with the New York Times, when asked about his second term agenda if re-elected."

    ------------

    He could have said he was planning to get covid under control or help financially struggling families, or any number of things, but he couldn't think of a single thing to accomplish in his second term.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "First, he is slandering the mostly peaceful protesters as “mobs”."

    We love this new addition to Zombie Newspeak: "mostly peaceful protesters". Thanks for the laughs, dear mh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This isn't rocket science:

      If you are carrying a sign with a political slogan, shouting words about a political issue, chaining arms and walking in the same direction as other people, female or with a child, you might be a protester.

      If you are under 25, have spray paint or a paintball gun, fireworks, running aimless down the street breaking stuff, shouting obscenities at figures of authority, picking up and throwing rocks and bottles, setting fires in trashcans, trying to overturn cars, you might be a rioter.

      If you are running in and out of a store with stuff in your arms, loading it into a nearby SUV or truck, you might be a looter.

      I find it hard to understand how anyone can confuse these groups except as a form of motivated obtuseness.

      Delete
    2. Hmm. How sexist of you, dear dembot. In fact, according to my observations, females are often the most violent "mostly peaceful protesters".

      See here, for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgEQsCqW59g

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 1:43pm, and if you are doing any of these things you are most likely to be white and middle class.

      Delete
    4. Isa black and po so isa just be a lazy no good dancin fool, big lipped and wide eyed, hair slicked back with chicken grease. Watch out watermelon!

      I have a dream someday I'll be white and middle class.

      Delete
  8. Why does Somerby mention Rayshard Brooks in his title but then nowhere in his article?

    Does he think it is a cute play of David Brooks's name? It is irrelevant to it and to anything he says.

    This is another example of "loose association" that results in schizophrenic word salad, chaining words together because they sound similar, free associating without any meaning-related filter for appropriateness and relevance.

    This is a symptom of frontal lobe damage or deterioration, as occurs in dementia.

    Somerby is not being playful. He should see his physician.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why does Somerby mention Rayshard Brooks in his title but then nowhere in his article?

      Because it's an example of what TDH thinks is the novelization in reporting. R. Brooks fell asleep in his car in the sense that he was drunk and passed out, leading to his attempted and botched arrest. (D. Brooks has been asleep at the wheel of his Op-Ed job for years without the excuse of inebriation.)

      Does he think it is a cute play of David Brooks's name? It is irrelevant to it and to anything he says.

      No, it's not a play on names. The parallel novelization TDH complains about is Nicole Wallace's. I believe that Wallace discussed the Rayshard Brooks case on her show. I don't have the interest to track down her comments then, and TDH refuses to detail his complaints about Wallace now.

      This is another example of "loose association" that results in schizophrenic word salad, chaining words together because they sound similar,....

      No, you'd have to listen to TDH's speech to make such a diagnosis In any case, the term of art you're looking for is clang association, strings of words introduced for their sound rather than their meaning. A clang association would be something like "Brooks, cooks, nooks" when neither gastronomy nor alcoves has any sensible connection in a statement about David Brooks. In any case, the "novelist" in question isn't Brooks; it's Wallace.

      This is a symptom of frontal lobe damage or deterioration, as occurs in dementia.

      What's your excuse for your evident cognitive problems?

      Somerby is not being playful. He should see his physician.

      Professor heal thyself.

      Delete
    2. It isn't right for Somerby to use Rayshard Brooks as shorthand for narrative (I think you are reading that into his title, not sure it was intended), when many of us didn't agree with him back when he did talk about the specifics. And there is still no connection between that Brooks and the one he does discuss who is a both-siderist conservative.

      Delete
    3. Your explanations don't make sense, deadrat. And why do you blame Corby for every anonymous comment anyone makes?

      Delete
    4. It isn't right for Somerby to use Rayshard Brooks as shorthand for narrative....

      Do you mean it's a moral failing to use Rayshard Brooks to make a rhetorical point? Or do you mean that TDH is wrong that the reporting on Rayshard Brooks was an example of narrative?

      (I think you are reading that into his title, not sure it was intended)

      I'm open to a reasonable argument that my reading is forced. Why do you think TDH refers to Rayshard Brooks?

      And there is still no connection between that Brooks and the one he does discuss who is a both-siderist conservative.

      May I suggest that you actually read what I write before responding to me. I agree with you: as I said, I find no connection between Rayshard Brooks and his last-namesake, that oh-so-tortured "conservative" who for years on the NYT OpEd page, wrung his hands over the Republican Party but until now couldn't bring himself to support a Democrat. Fuck him.

      The narrative that TDH complains of is that of Nicole Wallace, another Trump enabler that we're supposed to forgive and welcome into the family. Ditto for her as for DB.

      Delete
    5. Your explanations don't make sense, deadrat.

      If that's so, then that would mean that I'm wrong, a not uncommon occurrence. In fact, it's the human condition. Please tell me what strikes you as nonsensical and preferably provide a correct explanation.

      And why do you blame Corby for every anonymous comment anyone makes?

      Blame? I think you mean attribute.

      I fancy that I can detect the professor's particular brand of rhetoric and (lack of coherent) argument. In that, I may be wrong as she and her cohort of ignoramuses are much alike. Enough alike that it doesn't make much difference if I'm in error about this.

      The professor may correct me if I've misattributed a wrong-headed screed to her. But as I've said before, if you don't have the courtesy to adopt an identifying nym for purposes of keeping the conversation straight, you don't get to complain about being identified incorrectly.

      Delete
    6. Eugene Fernandez was a guest on the Deadline: White House with Nicole Wallace segment mentioned above. On the segment, he says "Rayshard Brooks fell asleep in his car".

      Delete
    7. Thank you, @11:46A. Saved me the trouble of jumping through the hoops required to stream the show.

      Delete
    8. "welcome into the family"

      What family? MSNBC is corporate media, owned and run by corporatists and Republicans.

      Delete
  9. Somerby can tolerate Tucker Carlson but not Nicole Wallace. Does her being female perhaps have something to do with that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Healthy female discretion is another man's hateful anger, for some rejection justifies sexism.

      Hahahaha I took someone way too young for me out to lunch but she wasn't interested so now I pretend it was a misunderstanding.

      Delete
    2. “Somerby can tolerate Tucker Carlson but not Nicole Wallace. Does her being female perhaps have something to do with that?”

      Oh, that’s garbage. TDH has stated that he can’t tolerate Carlson, but advises that he be watched for video footage that you won’t see elsewhere.

      Delete
    3. "TDH has stated that he can’t tolerate Carlson"

      Acually, in my humble opinion our dear Bob is slandering Mr Carlson.

      Motivated solely by dear Bob's 'tribal' allegiance -- because what else? As I remember, he has never produced a single Carlson quote to justify his disdain for Mr Carlson.

      And that good. That means that Mr Carlson's TV show is perfect.

      Delete
    4. We’ve got a couple of months left of this. Even Bob’s using descriptors that are generally applied to Hitler.

      At some point there will be spontaneous human combustion.

      Delete
    5. Not garbage, TDH is obviously coy when he says he can not tolerate Tucker, if you believe otherwise, you are allowing yourself to be conned.

      Delete
    6. Cecelia's smelly vaginaAugust 28, 2020 at 3:28 PM

      Listen it is not a good time to get on my bad side, mmmk.

      Delete
    7. Yeah. They already had spontaneous mass-head explosion in the morning of 11/9/2016.

      Should Our Beloved Commander win this one, I can't even imagine what they'll do. Lemming-like cliff jumping is not out of the question.

      Delete
    8. “ Not garbage, TDH is obviously coy when he says he can not tolerate Tucker, if you believe otherwise, you are allowing yourself to be conned”

      Somerby is anything but coy.

      Delete
    9. Cecelia's neglected Monistat creamAugust 28, 2020 at 9:44 PM

      You may not realize Somerby is coy because you are not young and pretty.

      Now girl, come get me out of the medicine cabinet, your vibrator has been talking about going on strike!

      Delete
    10. I wasn’t exactly right right, but I was very close.

      I had thought you were douche.

      Delete
    11. That's nothing, the corporate-owned mainstream media thought you were "economically anxious".

      Delete
  10. Commenters that support TDH: right wing nuts

    Commenters critical of TDH: eveyone else

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for making TDH's point for him about tribalism.

      I sometimes support TDH. Does that make a right wing nut outright or only a sometime right wing nut?

      Delete
    2. You've never heard of the exception that proves the rule?

      Delete
    3. I can read your mind deadrat, you have never supported TDH. Boo!

      Identifying who supports and who is critical of TDH may be tribal in some meaningless sense, which is fine - I am pro tribal under the current circumstances, but it is not harmful to my progressive political goals. It is suggestive of what TDH accomplishes, among which may be a deepening of tribalism - future anthropologists will no doubt investigate. But maybe not, I think mostly what TDH accomplishes is a mild feeling of pity.

      Delete
    4. You've never heard of the exception that proves the rule?

      I have, and not only that, I understand what it means.

      Which you clearly don't.

      Delete
    5. I can read your mind deadrat,....

      You and Alan Parsons. I trust you save that for nights when insomnia strikes.

      I have no idea what the rest of your word salad means, so Boo! backatchya.

      Delete
    6. 1:39 did not make TDH's point about tribalism, if anything it points to TDH's own tribalism.

      Beyond that, tribalism does not hurt liberal (or progressive) goals.

      Delete
  11. Digby thinks that the more Trump talks about BLM, the greater support there is among voters for BLM, looking at the polling over the past few months:

    https://digbysblog.net/2020/08/theres-nothing-to-fear-but-trump-himself/

    Voters seem to blame Trump for being terrible on race relations and they see him as supporting right-wing domestic terrorists. They are not blaming the left for this violence.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We saw thia angry old frustrated loser white male ("we liberals') do a librul strip-tease on Zimmermann. he has already taken one veil off on Rittemhouse - just watch him chew on broken glass to defend the snot-nosed monster's "legal rights". "We librulz" .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm pretty librulz, and I support Rittenhouse's legal rights. Don't you?

      What exactly didn't you like about TDH's blogs on Zimmerman?

      Delete
    2. I didn't like TDH's assumption that if he could find a single discrepancy in someone's account then that means the whole discussion falls apart and we must consider Zimmerman blameless or the cop who shot Michael Brown justified, or Rittenhouse acting in self defense. Evidence consists of a lot of pieces of information that are taken as a whole to reach a conclusion, not an argument that can be disproved if you find one flaw in reasoning (as philosophers and mathematicians perhaps think about things). Somerby seems incapable of thinking about likelihoods and probabilities of things being true or not.

      But more than that, I think his discussions here are sophistry and that he has undisclosed political motives for saying what he does, about Zimmerman, about Brown, and soon about Rittenhouse who is a hero on the conservative sites.

      Delete
    3. What are Rapist Joe's likelihoods and probabilities in the Tara Reade episode, dear dembot?

      Delete
    4. ...and also in Rapist Joe's Ukrainian and Chinese influence peddling episodes?

      Delete

    5. Gloucon XAugust 28, 2020 at 7:30 PM
      5:47 PM said: Evidence consists of a lot of pieces of information..."

      Correct, and it seems that you don't have any. So maybe you should stop polluting this site with your ignorance.

      Wiki: In March 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice (which was run by Barack Obama and Eric Holder) reported the conclusion of its own investigation and cleared Wilson of civil rights violations in the shooting. It found forensic evidence supported Wilson's account, and that witnesses who corroborated the officer's account were credible. Witnesses who had incriminated him were found to be not credible, with some admitting they had not directly seen the events. The U.S. Department of Justice concluded that Wilson shot Brown in self-defense.

      ReplyDelete

      Delete
    6. Wilson unloaded his gun at Brown in self defense, as anyone would who was being ran at by someone with the superhuman quickness and strength all black males possess.

      Delete
    7. Rittenhouse's legal rights exist regardless of how Somerby feels, but it would be an odd take to focus on his self-defense rights considering what happened, even for Republicans. Maybe I am naive about the extent of their cold-heartedness.

      You could follow Florida's law exactly and easily find Zimmerman guilty. Polls indicate most blacks would have found him guilty, and overall an even split on guilty and not guilty among the public. I would have found him guilty, as well as everyone I know. Somerby seemed to express a distaste for those convinced he was guilty, seems to have a distaste for accusations of racism. I have a distaste for the actual jury, a distaste for racism.

      I suppose Somerby might have a sensitivity to dealing with outcomes he dislikes so he psychologically positions himself in such a way to minimize the blow when things go awry, being charitable.

      Wilson was cleared on narrow grounds. He behaved unprofessionally and incompetently in the events that led up to the shooting, choosing to instigate instead of de-escalating. One can be satisfied with the DOJ finding, I find that stance immoral.

      The air, water, and land in the US are polluted, our nest is spoiled. I do not find 5:47 particularly ignorant, I do find it distasteful if that is the pollution you are concerned about.

      We have court cases and law that outlaw various acts of racism, yet it persists. Waving a DOJ finding in someone's face is obnoxious.



      Delete
    8. I didn't like TDH's assumption that if he could find a single discrepancy in someone's account then that means ... we must consider Zimmerman blameless

      Sorry, I don't remember TDH saying that Zimmerman was blameless. I think he said that we don't know a crucial fact, namely what happended when Zimmerman and Martin bumped into each other in the dark. And we don't, do we? That's a common problem when the defendant has killed the only witness, but that's a problem with Florida law, not TDH.

      or the cop who shot Michael Brown justified

      That wasn't TDH. That was Eric Holder's DOJ, right?

      or Rittenhouse acting in self defense.

      That's not what TDH said. He said that Rittenhouse has the right to mount a legal defense. Don't you agree with that?

      In fact, Rittenhouse will likely claim as a defense to intentional homicide (that's called first degree murder where I live) that he was acting to prevent the commisson of felonies (looting), an affirmative defense in Wisconsin. Do you realize that in Wisconsin, the state has to prove BARD that he was unreasonably mistaken? I don't know if TDH was hinting at that or not.

      Evidence consists of a lot of pieces of information that are taken as a whole to reach a conclusion, not an argument that can be disproved if you find one flaw in reasoning (as philosophers and mathematicians perhaps think about things). Somerby seems incapable of thinking about likelihoods and probabilities of things being true or not.

      I can't disagree with most of that, although I don't know what TDH is capable of thinking and what he's not. But legal evidence and argument is an entirely different thing, and as applied to the Zimmermann case, "likelihoods and probabilites" weren't enough to fill in what only Zimmerman and Martin ever knew.

      But more than that, I think his discussions here are sophistry and that he has undisclosed political motives for saying what he does, about Zimmerman, about Brown, and soon about Rittenhouse who is a hero on the conservative sites.

      I suppose that sophistry is in the mind of the beholder. TDH is a stubborn contrarian, and I think that sometimes his objections make sense and sometimes they don't. My recollection is that he was right about the Zimmerman and Brown cases. I'm willing to stand corrected if my memory has failed me. So far he hasn't said anything substantive about Rittenhouse, so condemnation is premature.

      I don't know how you determine "undisclosed political motives," and I don't know why it matters. No matter TDH's motives, his arguments stand or fall on their evidence and their logic, independent of motivation.

      Delete
    9. Rittenhouse's legal rights exist regardless of how Somerby feels, but it would be an odd take to focus on his self-defense rights considering what happened, even for Republicans. Maybe I am naive about the extent of their cold-heartedness.

      Well, if you believe there's a limit to Republicans' cold-heartedness, then you're naive. There's no bottom there.

      But I think you've misread what TDH wrote, which was that Rittenhouse's case will "involve his right to mount a defense for his actions." That might involve a claim of self-defense; it might not. As I pointed out in another comment, his defense might include the prevention of a felony. He needn't put on any defense at all. Rittenhouse hasn't even entered a plea yet.

      You could follow Florida's law exactly and easily find Zimmerman guilty.

      This is factually incorrect. Florida's law was designed to let people like Zimmerman get away with murder. People answering pollsters, the general public, you, and everyone you know didn't hear the evidence, didn't have the law explained to them, and didn't take an oath to uphold it no matter their feelings.

      For you, Somerby seems to express things and seems to have a distaste for things, and you have a distaste for a jury that followed a law you clearly don't seem to understand.

      Wilson wasn't cleared on "narrow grounds." He was cleared on the evidence that showed he was being attacked. I've read the DOJ report. Have you? I also think Wilson was incompetent, but that means he shouldn't be a cop, not that he should have been indicted for illegal homicide.

      Delete
    10. Here is a description of the defense of Rittenhouse now being mounted by the right:

      https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/8/28/1973189/-Green-lighting-murder-Tide-of-right-wing-support-for-Kenosha-protest-killings-will-encourage-more

      See how much of this Somerby dares to echo later today and next week.

      Delete
    11. I remember blogger going into ORGASMS when picture after picture after picture of Zimmermann failed to show a head wound until ONE FINALLY DID.

      Blogger would have killed for that evidence.

      He is going to get even more excruciating defending the actions of snot-nosed Rittenhouse.

      sprinkling "we librulz" liberally around, he will establish the murderous kid is St. Francis of Assisi.

      Delete
    12. I disagree that it is factually incorrect. I know what the law says (it is brief and does not mention any "design"), and based on the law it is easy to find Zimmerman guilty. Were a juror to find that Zimmerman was not reasonably in fear, that juror can in fact find him guilty. This is what much of the public found. Juries are made up of the public, the trial was public, it was scrutinized more than most trials.

      I understood what TDH wrote and meant, and while it is not arguable, it is a strange take, considering what happened.

      The DOJ cleared Wilson on the basis of the actions occurring during the shooting and the scuffle just prior. Fine, but I find that immoral. He could have easily been fired and found negligent. At least the report did find systemic racial bias, the family won a civil lawsuit, and the local prosecutors/asst prosecutors involved lost an election and were fired. To use the narrow finding to dismiss someone's concern over police brutality I find offensive.

      I also find it distasteful when TDH and others hide behind excessive literalism and transient authorities, merely to win a point to boot.

      Delete
    13. I disagree that it is factually incorrect.

      Of course you do. That's because you're an Anonymous Ignoramus. As your next sentence will show.

      I know what the law says

      Relies on facts not in evidence.

      (it is brief and does not mention any "design")

      It doesn't have to be lengthy, and of course it doesn't mention its design. But it was specifically written to make it practically impossible to convict someone who shoots and kills another in a dispute in public. In practice, of course, you have to be white to get off, but that's no surprise in Florida.

      and based on the law it is easy to find Zimmerman guilty.

      Just say that it would be easy for you to have found Zimmerman guilty because you would have put your sense of justice over the requirements of a bad law. At least that would be truthful.

      Were a juror to find that Zimmerman was not reasonably in fear, that juror can in fact find him guilty.

      That's just a tautology, you numpty. Jurors are supposed to weigh the evidence, and the law demands they reject Zimmerman's fear as unreasonable only if the evidence shows that beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you even know what went on at the trial?

      OK, if you had been on the jury, to see justice done, you would have ignored your oath. Just own it, but don't tell me you understand a law you clearly don't.

      Delete
    14. The DOJ cleared Wilson on the basis of the actions occurring during the shooting and the scuffle just prior. Fine, but I find that immoral.

      It's fine but immoral? WTF does that mean?

      On second thought, don't bother to explain. What you find immoral is irrelevant.

      He could have easily been fired and found negligent.

      Any evidence for these claims? Hard to know about being fired, since Wilson resigned. Very unlikely that Brown's family could have overcome Wilson's qualified immunity so that he could have been found personally negligent. Hard to know about negligence in an official capacity, since Ferguson settled the case out of court.

      Do you know anything at all about this case?

      At least the report did find systemic racial bias,

      It did.

      the family won a civil lawsuit

      No, they took a settlement.

      and the local prosecutors/asst prosecutors involved lost an election and were fired.

      Yep, the St Louis County Prosecutor lost the next election, and his successor fired three assistant prosecutors.

      To use the narrow finding to dismiss someone's concern over police brutality I find offensive.

      This is a new complaint, no? Please quote TDH to the effect that the legal finding on Darren Wilson means that anyone's concern over police brutality should be dismissed.

      While you're at it, please quote TDH to the effect that you have to consider Wilson justified because the DOJ exonerated him on his use of force.

      I ask because I think you're outraged at what you think TDH wrote. It would do you good to examine what TDH actually wrote. You could always decide to still be outraged.

      I also find it distasteful when TDH and others hide behind excessive literalism and transient authorities, merely to win a point to boot.

      I take it that by "excessive literalism" you mean accuracy.

      What the hell are "transient authorities"?

      Delete
    15. This seems very important to you, I appreciate your passion.

      The law is FL code 776.012:

      A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

      I agree a white defendant is likely not troubled as much by this law in areas where jurors have racial bias.

      It is though indeed easy to find there was not reasonable fear in the Zimmerman case. I, along with tens of millions of people, watched the trial, and just as many of us found, beyond a reasonable doubt, Zimmerman did not reasonably believe..., as otherwise.

      I could see how a fearful person might struggle with this, racial bias aside. The bar for feeling imminent death or great bodily harm may be low for such people. They are quick to run or quick to fight without reasonably believing such events might happen, and may apply a fear bias if considering a case like Zimmerman.

      Your quibbles with the Wilson case are trivial.

      I was responding to a commenter, same complaint.

      I am not outraged by TDH, I find TDH strange. I am outraged by aspects of our society, if you are not, you are lucky to live a life with less concern than most.

      Excessive literalism may involve accuracy. Blind devotion to accuracy is not without flaws. Things can be accurate yet misleading. Black people do have lower IQs on average, for example. More whites are killed by police than blacks. Context matters. CLM!

      Data, laws, interpretation of laws, scientific theories, media narratives, norms, philosophies, change over time; still I take your point.


      Delete
    16. This seems very important to you, I appreciate your passion.

      You have no idea what I think is important or what I'm passionate about. Fuck your appreciation, and I mean that in the nicest possible way.

      The law is FL code 776.012:

      Yeah, I know the law as written. I've also read the jury instructions. I know what the burdens of production and proof are and where they lie, as well as the mandatory interpretation of various terms of art, e.g., "reasonable doubt."

      It is though indeed easy to find there was not reasonable fear in the Zimmerman case.

      As I am now tired of pointing out, I don't dispute that it is indeed easy for you, in your ignorance and arrogance, to find no reasonable fear. I also do not dispute that there are tens of millions both as ignorant and self-assured as you.

      The finding was not so easy for jurors faithful to their oaths. And for good reason.

      Try finding BARD the absence of Zimmerman's fear from the testimony presented in court. Remember that you have no rebuttal witnesses, and you can't evaluate Zimmerman himself as a witness because he didn't testify. But you do have his claims, as introduced by the prosecution. You're also to be guided by the judge's explanation of your duties under the law.

      I'll wait.

      Your quibbles with the Wilson case are trivial.

      For values of quibbles equal to your inability to discuss or perhaps your uninterest in discussing the claims of TDH's alleged malfeasance. Fine by me. I gather we're just talking past each other on this matter.

      I am not outraged by TDH.... I am outraged by aspects of our society

      If you say so. I have no basis to contradict your claims of your own interiority. Whether you're outraged by TDH or society or whether you're outraged at all makes no difference to my argument.

      Blind devotion to accuracy is not without flaws.

      What's that? Your family motto?

      Things can be accurate yet misleading.

      Do you have any idea how frustrating it can be to discuss things with people who have no sense of irony and are immune to cognitive dissonance? Never mind. My burden, not yours.

      Data, laws, interpretation of laws, scientific theories, media narratives, norms, philosophies, change over time;

      Sorry, but I have no idea how this is relevant. But thanks for sharing.

      still I take your point.

      I don't understand how you can take a point you miss, but I think we're done, aren't we?

      Delete
    17. I feel your passion, yet it remains the case that it is easy for many if not most people to find, based on the trial, that Zimmerman did not reasonably believe he was in danger of death or great bodily harm.

      Like millions of us, I have read the law, I have read the jury instructions.

      Jurors do not face a consequence for their decisions, they can use whatever method they want to reach a decision, thier minds can not be read. Having said that, it is terribly easy, BARD, to find that the totality of what was presented in trial indicates Zimmerman did not reasonably fear for his life. To find otherwise may indeed be the result of a racial or fear bias.

      "Reasonably believed" is not the result of science or logic, it is at the juror's discretion.

      Maybe someday juries will have access to the internal thoughts of a defendant. Not a world I would look forward to but I am certain that Zimmerman's thoughts would reveal he was not reasonably fearful.

      My take on what is reasonable may differ from yours, the law does not offer guidance, nor the instructions. I am free to define what Zimmerman reasonably believed, what reasonable fear is, however I want, even as a juror.

      When you quibble with my lack of interest in your quibbles, it does tickle a bit.




      Delete
    18. I feel your passion

      You think you do, just like you feel what "most people" would find, just like you feel you know what Zimmerman believed that night, just like you feel you know the law.

      Some day I hope to be as sure about anything as you are about everything.

      (By the way, didn't I just tell you to go fuck your feelings?
      No, no. My bad: that was your appreciation. Never mind.)

      Barring accepting bribes, jurors indeed may with impunity make any decision they want. But I'm talking about the law, and thus what jurors faithful to their oath would do. I'm not sure, but I think you're talking about yourself.

      Which is of little interest to me, as it tells me nothing about the outcome of the Zimmerman trial.

      "Reasonably believed" is not the result of science or logic, it is at the juror's discretion.

      You couldn't possibly have read the jury instructions.

      I am certain that Zimmerman's thoughts would reveal he was not reasonably fearful.

      No doubt. Like many an ignoramus, you're certain of many things that you have no basis for being certain about.

      I am free to define what Zimmerman reasonably believed....

      Of course you are. What you're not free to do is make your definition comport with the law. That's my only point.

      Delete
    19. The only thing I'm sure Zimmerman was thinking is that liberals are snowflakes.
      It's how that works.

      Delete
    20. One thing that could add to the discussion. at the Martin trial, there was an apparently disinterested witness who testified he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, pummeling him. There was other evidence - but that a jury would have reasonable doubt was entirely plausible. The jury included at least one black juror, maybe more (it could be looked up). Racial bias in determining guilt (or innocence) is wrong, but those who seem so sure of what happened, not having been at the scene, or having sat on the jury, are similarly biased. He was found not guilty after a fair trial, and given the testimony of that disinterested witness, it's not that surprising.

      Delete
    21. AC/MA you are wrong about the testimony and about a black juror, there was no such testimony nor a black juror. The witness you are referring to gave a somewhat similar statement to police; however, in trial on the stand he gave different testimony that amounted to him saying he was not sure what he saw.

      The law says you are justified in deadly force if you reasonably believed you were in danger of death or great bodily harm.

      The reasonableness is entirely left up to the jury. Polls show an even split on who thought Zimmerman was guilty - that he did not reasonably believe. Among blacks it was a majority.

      It is in fact easy to find Zimmerman guilty while following the law and the instructions.



      Delete
    22. The not guilty finding was surprising enough to give rise to one of the most significant and effective movements in history.

      Delete
    23. AC/MA,

      One of the themes here at TDH is how people come to believe they know something. As Mattel had one of its talking Barbies say, "Ars longa, vita brevis, iudicium difficile." Or loosely translated, "knowledge is hard."

      TDH, of course, says that to save labor, we too often substitute narrative for careful judgment, but there are other processes involved, including one pertinent here, the certainty of knowing the interiority of others.

      We see this all the time, as Anonymous Ignoramuses declare that Somerby is no liberal and that he hates women because of his relationship to his mother. We see this here as our Anonymous Ignoramus interlocutor speaks on behalf of not millions, but "tens of millions" of people about what went on in Zimmerman's mind just before he killed Martin.

      The conviction of the Anonymous Ignoramus that he is correct is unshakable, as his conviction that his judgment is universally applauded. Except, of course, for people like me (who are overly concerned with accuracy) and Somerby (who must be at heart a Republican).

      The disinterested witness was John Good, whose trial testimony did differ from his statements to police. On the stand, he just wasn't sure about what he saw. The Anonymous Ignoramus crows about this, although Good's testimony thereby made reasonable doubt the only reasonable conclusion.

      There was one non-white juror, Maddy Rivera. Was she black (or in today's parlance Black and in TDH's "black")? She identifies as Hispanic, which isn't a racial classification. Let's just say that before the Voting Rights Act, she wouldn't been allowed to vote in Alabama.

      Yes, Florida law says reasonably believe, but the reasonable person must take the subjective view of the claimant, and the state must prove the claimant wrong beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Yes, the decision of reasonableness is entirely the jury's, but the definition of reasonableness is given by the law, as explained by the judge.

      It is in fact easy to find Zimmerman guilty while following the law and the jury instructions, but only if you're an ignoramus who's decided to ignore both the law and the instructions.

      Did you notice that the evidence our Anonymous Ignoramus cites is "polls"? That's because ignoramuses believe that pooling ignorance is a reliable method to gather reliable evidence.

      They're wrong.

      Delete
    24. Polls are cited because the jury is made up of the same thing as polls, the public. The trial was public, we all know the law, the instructions, the presentations at the trial. It was one of the most highly scrutinized trials. About half of all people, and a large majority of blacks found BARD that Zimmerman did not reasonably believe he was in danger of death etc.

      Jurors are often ignorant people. If one wants a jury of trained scientists and philosophers, that would be a different justice system. In this case, the law and the instructions were not difficult to understand, they are brief and simple - and similar.

      It is easy to find Zimmerman guilty, while following the law and instructions. It hinges on if you think he reasonably believed he was in danger of death etc. The law nor the instructions limit a juror to a not guilty finding. A juror is free to find how they want, understand "reasonably believed" however they want.

      If the defendant is white and the victim is black, it is easy to encounter racial bias. Others may find Zimmerman not guilty due to a fear bias. Without these biases it is incredibly easy to find Zimmerman guilty, fully cognizant of the law and the instructions.

      Delete
    25. we all know the law

      Who's "we"? You clearly don't.

      Jurors are often ignorant people.

      I believe that's what's called projection.

      And I believe the rest of your screed is called trolling.

      Buh-bye.

      Delete
    26. The law is FL code 776.012:

      A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

      The jury instructions are pretty much the same.

      They are both simple and straightforward. "Reasonably" is the key word.

      Ignorance and projection are not uncommon traits.

      There is no intent on trolling.

      Zimmerman may have believed he was in danger, one can find that and still find him guilty. I did not find that, I do not think he believed he was in danger, I think he acted out of anger, some of which sprung from a racial bias. Regardless, it is easy to find he did not reasonably believe he was in danger.

      It is indeed easy to find Zimmerman guilty.

      Delete
    27. There is no intent on trolling.

      Perhaps I was too hasty, so I'll make one more try. The law in general is not "simple and straightforward." It has its own language and its own rules for interpretation.

      Notice who is tasked with being reasonable in Florida -- the person using or threatening deadly force. This is called the subjective standard. The jury must consider the situation from the accused point of view, and they must conclude the person was wrong beyond a reasonable doubt. The law needn't be written this way, and it isn't in other states. A brief look on the intertubes reveals that Michigan for instance follows the so-called objective standard. Under this standard an action is reasonable if the hypothetical reasonable person would have taken the action.

      At this point you keep repeating things that are not in dispute:

      Zimmerman may have believed he was in danger, one can find that and still find him guilty.

      True. But if a juror has a reasonable doubt as to whether Zimmerman himself had no good reason to think he was in danger, then the law dictates a vote for acquittal.

      I did not find that, I do not think he believed he was in danger, I think he acted out of anger, some of which sprung from a racial bias.

      That's fine, as long as you realize that what you find, what you think, and what you believe is irrelevant to how a juror must act to comport with the law.

      Here's a possible scenario: Zimmerman and Martin are both surprised when they bump into each other in the dark. Each strikes out at the other, and Martin ends up on top of Zimmerman. As they struggle with each other, Zimmerman thinks that Martin is trying to take his own gun. From Zimmerman's point of view, is it possible that he reasonably fears for his lifer?

      If as a juror, you think that this is impossible beyond a reasonable doubt, then you may properly vote to convict. Otherwise, you may only properly vote to acquit.

      Notice that Florida law is so crazy that if Martin actually had taken Zimmerman's gun and shot and killed him, the law would dictate Martin's acquittal in the same way.

      It is indeed easy to find Zimmerman guilty.

      What you mean is that you think Zimmerman was guilty. And "indeed" it's easy to come to that conclusion. Why is Zimmerman walking around strapped? Why didn't he call out to Martin, "Hey, man, is everything OK? I'm George and I'm a member of the neighborhood watch." Why didn't Zimmerman stay in his car and wait for the police? Given the size mismatch and the extent of Zimmerman's injuries, how could this have been a life-threatening situation?

      And Zimmerman's post-trial behavior reflects badly on him.

      We wouldn't have armed ourselves in that neighborhood; we wouldn't have viewed a black teenager with automatic suspicion; we wouldn't have escalated a wrestling match into a fatal shooting; afterwards, we wouldn't gotten into fights, boasted about killing Martin, or tried to auction off the gun used in the killing.

      And being such virtuous people, we naturally want to see a bad actor punished. When the arc of the moral universe bends not to justice, we want to believe that given the chance, we would have and should have bent it back.

      But we part company there, because you're certain of your own virtue, your own knowledge of the law, and the propriety of your own proposed actions.

      Whether or not you be a troll, I'm done with you unless you've got something new to say, perhaps by way of actually engaging with my arguments.

      Delete
    28. The law and the instructions use the same language "reasonably believe".

      It does not matter whether the objective or subjective standard is used, it is easy to find Zimmerman guilty either way. Nothing in the trial indicated Zimmerman had a unique trait that would allow a subjective standard to be beneficial to his case.

      Having said that, I would note that the objective Michigan law uses identical language to the Florida law:

      -----
      "The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual."
      ------

      and the Florida law is objective, even according to the Republicans that made the law who stress the key word is "reasonably" (from a 2018 National Review article!):

      ----
      Florida state senator Dennis Bailey, who helped craft the legislation, emphasized that a person must “reasonably” believe deadly force is required.

      “Stand your ground uses a reasonable-person standard. It’s not that you were just afraid,” Baxley said. “It’s an objective standard.”

      Fellow Republican state senator Rob Bradley concurred, rejecting Gualtieri’s claim that the law relied on a “subjective standard.”

      “An individual using a gun in self-defense in Florida must have an objective, reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm. This idea that Florida law is concerned about the subjective perceptions of a shooter is wrong,” Bradley told Politico.
      -------

      Delete
    29. Herein lies the fallacy of trusting your own incompetence when reading the text of statutes.

      Here's how Michigan operates, from Radtke v. Everett, 442 Mich. 368, 390–391, 501 N.W.2d 155 (1993):


      The standard of conduct which the community demands must be an external and objective one, rather than the individual judgment, good or bad, of the particular actor;


      In other words, the judgment of the whether the individual "honest and reasonably" believes something will be made by the mythical reasonable person. That's not how Florida works for the use of deadly force, and only a fool would believe the Florida clowns who wrote the Florida stand-your-ground law or the NR for that matter.

      It does not matter whether the objective or subjective standard is used, it is easy to find Zimmerman guilty either way. Nothing in the trial indicated Zimmerman had a unique trait that would allow a subjective standard to be beneficial to his case.

      Unique trait? Your ignorance is breathtaking.

      Delete
    30. There is nothing about a subjective standard that makes a guilty finding any less easy in the Zimmerman case.

      The only difference in the wording of the law in Michigan is the word "honestly".

      The Michigan case you cite is a sexual harassment case, and was talking about the Michigan Civil Rights Act and said that it indicated an objective standard and that if it intended a different standard it would have been explicitly mandated in the law. Then it quotes a Tort law book, that is where your quote comes from, not from the case.

      Basically you are full of beans.

      The Florida's law intent was to do away with the duty to retreat, not introduce a subjective standard. The objective standard is how the Florida law works. The article is about when law enforcement in Florida tried to use a subjective standard and they were rejected. The key words are "reasonably believed".

      Again there was nothing about Zimmerman that would make a subjective standard beneficial, so it is besides the point.

      These notions - objective, subjective, reasonable - are recognized in the law to be vague. To define them more precisely would put limitations the law does not want to impose. So it is left to the juror's discretion.

      It is odd you keep asserting my ignorance, yet you have been incorrect on all the pertinent points.

      Delete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  14. America is 4% of the world’s population
    We have 25% of the COVID cases
    And you spend way too much time being critical of a female Rhodes scholar
    While turning blind eyes to so much billshit.
    Me thinks you protest too much

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't worry, dear dembot. We've been informed by humyn media that gramma-murdering zombie-governors of NY, NJ, and CT may suffer the consequences, after all.

      "The DoJ is officially considering whether to launch high-profile federal investigations into a handful of mostly Democratic governors who adopted regulations requiring hospitals to return COVID-19 positive patients to nursing homes or other long-term care facilities, a blunder that has been described as perhaps the biggest policy error of the entire US outbreak."

      https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/andrew-cuomo-responsible-thousands-nursing-home-deaths-doj-trying-find-out

      Delete
    2. This is one of the best days of the Trump Presidency.
      Sure, the number of Americans killed by his criminal negligence climbed past 180,000, but someone also told him his tan looked natural.

      Delete
    3. Oh, actually it's not CT, I stand corrected.

      Department of Justice Requesting Data From Governors of States that Issued COVID-19 Orders that May Have Resulted in Deaths of Elderly Nursing Home Residents

      Data will help inform whether the Department of Justice will initiate investigations under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) regarding New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Michigan’s response to COVID-19 in public nursing homes

      Today the Justice Department requested COVID-19 data from the governors of states that issued orders which may have resulted in the deaths of thousands of elderly nursing home residents. New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Michigan required nursing homes to admit COVID-19 patients to their vulnerable populations, often without adequate testing.

      For example, on March 25, 2020, New York ordered: “No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to [a nursing home] solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19. [Nursing homes] are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for COVID-19 prior to admission or readmission.”

      “Protecting the rights of some of society’s most vulnerable members, including elderly nursing home residents, is one of our country’s most important obligations,” said Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Division Eric Dreiband. “We must ensure they are adequately cared for with dignity and respect and not unnecessarily put at risk.”


      Read the whole thing, dear dembot, and demand that gramma-murdering liberal governors and their liberal minions are punished.

      https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-requesting-data-governors-states-issued-covid-19-orders-may-have-resulted

      Tsk, what a shame: "[Nursing homes] are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for COVID-19 prior to admission or readmission.”"

      If this is not a mass-murder, I don't know what is.

      Delete
    4. Holy Republican National Convention spending a week violating the Hatch Act on national television, this is some big news! I hope those who break the law are held accountable.
      Thanks Mao.

      Delete
    5. What, a sudden loss of interest in COVID19, dear soros-dembot? Unable to concetrate? Sad.

      As for that 'act' thingy, call the cops, dear dembot. Ugh, sorry, call a social worker.

      Delete
    6. This is one of the best days of the Trump Presidency.
      Sure, the number of Americans killed by his criminal negligence climbed past 180,000, but someone believed his story about being complimented on his tan.

      Fixed for accuracy.

      Delete
    7. Hey, AC/DC, your state and its R-liberal gov'na is investigated also:

      Federal Investigation into Conditions at a Nursing Home for Veterans in Massachusetts Announced

      The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts have opened an investigation into the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke to examine whether the Soldiers’ Home violated the rights of residents by failing to provide them adequate medical care generally, and during, the coronavirus pandemic.


      Poor Charlie Baker, he sounds like such a nice fella...

      Delete
    8. "Poor Charlie Baker, he sounds like such a nice fella..."

      Good luck getting anyone to buy that. Baker is a Republican, and former businessman.

      Delete
  15. Hello my name is Jenna i want to share my amazing experience with the greatest spell caster Priest Ade my husband was cheating on me and when i found out we had a fight which lead to him filling for a divorce i cried and fell sick when i was searching about love quotes online i saw people talking about him and his great work whose case was similar to mine they left his contact info i contacted him and he told me not to worry that after 24hrs he will cancel the divorce and be back to me after i did everything he asked me to do to my greatest surprise the next day evening it was my husband he knelt down begging me to accept him back,thank you once again Priest Ade you are indeed a blessing to me he can also help you contact ancientspiritspellcast@yahoo.com or ancientspiritspellcast@gmail.com 
    Blog: https://priestade.blogspot.com
    WhatsApp +2347059715465  .

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hello my name is Jenna i want to share my amazing experience with the greatest spell caster Priest Ade my husband was cheating on me and when i found out we had a fight which lead to him filling for a divorce i cried and fell sick when i was searching about love quotes online i saw people talking about him and his great work whose case was similar to mine they left his contact info i contacted him and he told me not to worry that after 24hrs he will cancel the divorce and be back to me after i did everything he asked me to do to my greatest surprise the next day evening it was my husband he knelt down begging me to accept him back,thank you once again Priest Ade you are indeed a blessing to me he can also help you contact ancientspiritspellcast@yahoo.com or ancientspiritspellcast@gmail.com 
    Blog: https://priestade.blogspot.com
    WhatsApp +2347059715465  .

    ReplyDelete
  17. I have been suffering from a deadly disease (Hsv) for the past 3 years now, I had spent a lot of money going from one places to another, from churches to churches, hospitals have been my home every day residence. Constant checks up have been my hobby not until this faithful day, I was searching through the internet, I saw a testimony on how Dr Onokun helped someone in curing his (Hsv) herpes disease, quickly I copied his email which is Dronokunherbalcure@gmail.com just to give him a test I spoke to him, he asked me to do some certain things which I did, he told me that he is going to provide the herbal cure to me, which he did, then he asked me to go for medical checkup after some days after using the herbal cure, behold I was free from the deadly disease, he only asked me to post the testimony through the whole world, faithfully am doing it now, please brothers and sisters, he is great, I owe him in return. if you are having a similar problem just email him on : Dronokunherbalcure@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  18. My husband and I have been married for about 7 yrs now. We were happily married with two kids, a boy and a girl. 3 months ago, I started to notice some strange behavior from him and a few weeks later I found out that my husband is seeing someone. He started coming home late from work, he hardly care about me or the kids anymore, Sometimes he goes out and doesn't even come back home for about 2-3 days. I did all I could to rectify this problem but all to no avail. I became very worried and needed help. As I was browsing through the Internet one day, I came across a website that suggested that Dr Great can help solve marital problems, restore broken relationships and so on. So, I felt I should give him a try. I contacted him and he did a spell for me. Two days later, my husband came to me and apologized for the wrongs he did and promise never to do it again. Ever since then, everything has returned back to normal. I and my family are living together happily again.. All thanks to Dr Great . If you need a spell caster that can cast a spell that truly works, I suggest you contact him. He will not disappoint you. This is his E-mail: 

    infinitylovespell@gmail.com or infinitylovespell@yahoo.com

    WhatsApp +2348118829899

    Blog http://infinitylovespell1.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  19. My husband and I have been married for about 7 yrs now. We were happily married with two kids, a boy and a girl. 3 months ago, I started to notice some strange behavior from him and a few weeks later I found out that my husband is seeing someone. He started coming home late from work, he hardly care about me or the kids anymore, Sometimes he goes out and doesn't even come back home for about 2-3 days. I did all I could to rectify this problem but all to no avail. I became very worried and needed help. As I was browsing through the Internet one day, I came across a website that suggested that Dr Great can help solve marital problems, restore broken relationships and so on. So, I felt I should give him a try. I contacted him and he did a spell for me. Two days later, my husband came to me and apologized for the wrongs he did and promise never to do it again. Ever since then, everything has returned back to normal. I and my family are living together happily again.. All thanks to Dr Great . If you need a spell caster that can cast a spell that truly works, I suggest you contact him. He will not disappoint you. This is his E-mail: 

    infinitylovespell@gmail.com or infinitylovespell@yahoo.com

    WhatsApp +2348118829899

    Blog http://infinitylovespell1.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  20. Am Laura Mildred by name, i was diagnosed with Herpes 4 years ago i lived in pain with the knowledge that i wasn't going to ever be well again i contacted so many herbal doctors on this issue and wasted a large sum of money but my condition never got better i was determined to get my life back so one day i saw Mr. Morrison Hansen post on how Dr. Emu saved him from Herpes with herbal medicine i contacted Dr. Emu on his Email: Emutemple@gmail.com we spoke on the issue i told him all that i went through and he told me not to worry that everything will be fine again so he prepared the medicine and send it to me and told me how to use it, after 14 days of usage I went to see the doctor for test,then the result was negative, am the happiest woman on earth now thanks to Dr. Emu God bless you. Email him at: Emutemple@gmail.com Whats-app or Call him +2347012841542 

    ReplyDelete
  21. I just got my ex husband back through the help of Dr OSOFO love spells Experts!..My husband left me for another woman, This was just 2 years of our marriage. The most painful thing is that I was pregnant with our second baby. I wanted him back. I did everything within my reach to bring him back but all was in vain, I wanted him back so badly because of the love I had for him, I begged him with everything, I made promises but he refused. I explained my problem to my friend and she suggested that I should rather contact a spell caster that could help me cast a spell to bring him back , I had no choice than to try it. I messaged the spell caster call Dr OSOFO and he assured me there was no problem and that everything will be okay before 11 hours. He cast the spell and surprisingly 9 hours later my husband called me. I was so surprised, I answered the call and all he said was that he was so sorry for everything that had happened He wanted me to return to him. He also said he loved me so much. I was so happy andent to him that was how we started living together happily again.thanks to man, do not cry anymore, contact Dr.OSOFO for help now..Here his contact, WhatsApp him: +2349065749952 {or} Email him at: ( osofo.48hoursolutioncenter@gmail.com )  

    ReplyDelete
  22. I just got my ex husband back through the help of Dr OSOFO love spells Experts!..My husband left me for another woman, This was just 2 years of our marriage. The most painful thing is that I was pregnant with our second baby. I wanted him back. I did everything within my reach to bring him back but all was in vain, I wanted him back so badly because of the love I had for him, I begged him with everything, I made promises but he refused. I explained my problem to my friend and she suggested that I should rather contact a spell caster that could help me cast a spell to bring him back , I had no choice than to try it. I messaged the spell caster call Dr OSOFO and he assured me there was no problem and that everything will be okay before 11 hours. He cast the spell and surprisingly 9 hours later my husband called me. I was so surprised, I answered the call and all he said was that he was so sorry for everything that had happened He wanted me to return to him. He also said he loved me so much. I was so happy andent to him that was how we started living together happily again.thanks to man, do not cry anymore, contact Dr.OSOFO for help now..Here his contact, WhatsApp him: +2349065749952 {or} Email him at: ( osofo.48hoursolutioncenter@gmail.com )  

    ReplyDelete
  23. I’m recommending Dr Uromi to everyone who have herpes simplex virus to get the cure from him. I was diagnose of genital herpes in 2018 and i have been searching and asking questions to see if i could get something to cure the disease because i did not believe what the doctors say that no cure is found yet. I came across a comment on Youtube and the person testify how she was cured from herpes and hpv after using Dr Uromi herbal medicine. I quickly contact Dr Uromi and explain my problem to him and he prepare the herbs and send it to me through UPS and gave me instructions on how to use it and tell me to go for checkup after usage which i did after two weeks of taken the herbal medicine and my result was NEGATIVE. I waited another month and retested the result was still NEGATIVE and my doctor told me that am completely free from herpes. Am so happy and grateful to Dr Uromi for what he has done for me and i will continue to share this for people out there to know that there is cure for herpes. You can contact Dr Uromi on email and WhatsApp to get the cure from him. Email:Druromiherbalhome@gmail.com  and WhatsApp +2349021374574    .   

    ReplyDelete
  24. My name is James Rodriguez I am very happy for sharing this great testimonies, The best thing that has ever happened in my life is how I win the lottery euro million mega jackpot. I am a woman who believe that one day I will win the lottery. finally my dreams came through when I email dr Lucky and tell him I need the lottery numbers. I have spend so much money on ticket just to make sure I win. But I never know that winning was so easy until the day I meant the spell caster online which so many people has talked about that he is very great in casting lottery spell, . so I decide to give it a try. I contacted this great dr and he did a spell and he gave me the winning lottery numbers. But believe me when the draws were out I was among winners. I win 20,000 million Dollar. dr Lucky truly you are the best, with these great dr you can win millions of money through lottery. I am so very happy to meet these great man now, I will be forever be grateful to you dr. Email him for your own winning lottery numbers. drluckyhome@gmail.com whatsapp number +2348145810121  

    ReplyDelete
  25. Good luck to anyone reading this true life story of mine, I Was Diagnosed With type 2 Herpes Virus Last year, And I Was Looking For Solution To Be Cured Luckily I Saw Testimonies On How Dr OYAGU Cure Herpes Virus I Decided To Contact Dr OYAGU I Contacted Him He Prepared A Herbal Medicine Portion And Sent It To Me, I Started The Herbal Medicine For My Health. He Gave Me Step By Step Instructions On How To Apply It, When I Applied It As Instructed, I Was Cured Of This Deadly Herpes Within 2 weeks, I Am Now Herpes Negative. My Brother And Sister I No That There Are So Many People That Have The Same Herpes Virus Please contact Dr OYAGU To Help You Too, And Help Me To Thank Dr OYAGU For Cure Me, I’m Cured By Dr. OYAGU Herbal Medicine, His Contact Email:oyaguherbalhome@gmail.com or visit his website https://oyaguspellcaster.wixsite.com/oyaguherbalhome Or Cell Whatsapp Number +2348101755322 thank you

    ReplyDelete

  26. LOTTO, lottery,jackpot.
    Hello all my viewers, I am very happy for sharing this great testimonies,The best thing that has ever happened in my life is how I win the lottery euro million mega jackpot. I am a Woman who believe that one day I will win the lottery. finally my dreams came through when I email believelovespelltemple@gmail.com and tell him I need the lottery numbers. I have spend so much money on ticket just to make sure I win. But I never know that winning was so easy until the day I meant the spell caster online which so many people has talked about that he is very great in casting lottery spell, . so I decide to give it a try.I contacted this great Dr Believe and he did a spell and he gave me the winning lottery numbers. But believe me when the draws were out I was among winners. I win 30,000 million Dollar. Dr Believe truly you are the best, all thanks to you forever

    ReplyDelete