Today's Pix

click a pic to biggen it up

Today's GIF

Trump's latest "pivot"

Today's Hillary

Just in the last several years:

Hillary's emails:
Looks bad, and while there's a few bits and pieces, nothing to get your panties in a bunch over.

DNC emails:
Democrats "conspiring" to nominate a Democrat. Color me unsurprised. Moving on.

Benghazi!!!!!:
Get fucking serious.

"Scandal" after "scandal" for 25 years; and 25 years of "oooh, this time for sure; those indictments are coming any minute now" - and there's just never ever anything that amounts to more than a little nose-wrinkle?

Now, we can add The Clinton Foundation thing to the pile.

Tuesday afternoon, Stephen Braun and Eileen Sullivan of the Associated Press released the results of a review of State Department appointment data that they used to make some striking claims about Hillary Clinton’s schedule as secretary of state.

According to their reporting, Clinton spent a remarkably large share of her time as America’s chief diplomat talking to people who had donated money to the Clinton Foundation. She went out of her way to help these Clinton Foundation donors, and her decision to do so raises important concerns about the ethics of her conduct as secretary and potentially as president. It’s a striking piece of reporting that made immediate waves in my social media feed, as political journalists of all stripes retweeted the story’s headline conclusions.

Except it turns out not to be true. The nut fact that the AP uses to lead its coverage is wrong, and Braun and Sullivan’s reporting reveals absolutely no unethical conduct. In fact, they found so little unethical conduct that an enormous amount of space is taken up by a detailed recounting of the time Clinton tried to help a former Nobel Peace Prize winner who’s also the recipient of a Congressional Gold Medal and a Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Here’s the bottom line: Serving as secretary of state while your husband raises millions of dollars for a charitable foundation that is also a vehicle for your family’s political ambitions really does create a lot of space for potential conflicts of interest. Journalists have, rightly, scrutinized the situation closely. And however many times they take a run at it, they don’t come up with anything more scandalous than the revelation that maybe billionaire philanthropists have an easier time getting the State Department to look into their visa problems than an ordinary person would.

If there's really anything there, and she always just gets away with it, then the fact that 25 years of hard snooping, GOP Congressional Investigations and many many millions of dollars spent - to find practically nothing - all of that would have to mean Hillary Clinton is the most amazing of all evil genius super-criminal masterminds ever - and she's not.

I'm not a fan.  I try to trust politicians no farther that I could spit one of 'em.  But at a certain point, since this particular politician is the one we've got, maybe we could figure out how to take 'yes' for an answer, admit that we agree with her on some things, help her do the things she says she agrees with us on, and always keep the pressure on her to do those other things.  You know - kinda do that thing we like to call, uhmm, what is again? Oh yeah - Politics.

And all the rest of that shit?  You're not getting any of that - wish for something else.

  

Today's Press Poodling

(all of this was front page at HuffPo as of about 11:40am today)

Because of this:

We get all this:

Don't get me wrong, I want to know about the negative side of Hillary's ledger.  But does it really have to be part of an obvious attempt at artificially pimping the horse race narrative?

Today's Tweet

George Zimmerman is a hero to everyone who wants to legally kill the person kicking your ass in a fight you started.

— John Fugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) August 5, 2016

The Other Day's Today

I managed to be woefully mis-informed, and missed it, but on August 18, 1920 - The 19th Amendment was ratified by Tennessee, making it part of the US Constitution.

A weird political irony is that with the exception of a few states, only the men could vote to make the government stop denying the women's right to vote. (and I promise I'm not trying to steal the thunder and pat myself on the back for being so magnanimously man-errific)  

And it just seems like a good example of Progressives being right again (which happens a lot), and the Conservatives being wrong again (which, funnily enough, happens just as often).  

And you don't have to look very far to find what I think is pretty good evidence to back that up.

When you think about which states you'd consider to be "typically conservative" (and if you're more or less normal), you're prob'ly thinking those states are in the South.

Now consider this list of when certain states finally got around to ratifying the 19th Amendment.

Virginia 1952

Alabama 1953

Florida 1969

South Carolina 1969 (not certified until 1973)

Georgia 1970

Louisiana 1970

North Carolina 1971

Mississippi 1984

 

Just as a little reminder - there's a better than even chance that one or more of the women in that picture went home to places that weren't just indifferent to their service and accomplishments, but downright hostile to their having a reasonable expectation of simply being treated as equals.  

Their fight continues, and we all continue to benefit from their victories.

John Oliver

Larry Sabato

Home town hero (as long as he agrees with me of course) Larry Sabato runs a little joint called The Center For Politics at UVa, and he's gotten pretty good at what he does.

Here's a little snapshot of where Professor Sabato thinks we stand right now:

What about the overall picture? As our regular readers know, we’ve been the Rock of Gibraltar when it comes to a Clinton victory. Our first electoral map, issued at the end of March, showed Clinton at 347 EVs to 191 EVs for Trump, and all subsequent maps have maintained those totals — until now. After looking carefully at Nebraska’s 2nd District — Nebraska being, along with Maine, a state that awards one electoral vote to the winner of each congressional district — we’ve decided that NE-2 is leaning toward Clinton. It isn’t much of a lean, and it’s possible that if Trump can tighten up the contest, this one will wobble back to the Republicans. But for the moment, adding NE-2 to the Democrats makes Clinton’s total 348 EVs and Trump’s total 190 EVs. As you’ll recall, Obama carried this district in 2008 but lost it in 2012, so it’s on the margins — yet it also ranks 49th out of 435 congressional districts for percentage of non-Hispanic whites with a bachelor’s degree or higher. Moreover, not only is Clinton investing ad money in Omaha, which also bleeds into the western parts of swing state Iowa, she is also spending actual campaign time in the city, a sign that her campaign believes it can win this extra electoral vote. And did we mention Warren Buffett, a huge Hillary fan, dominates the economic landscape there?

But wait just a durn minute - Tim Kaine made visits to both Idaho and Wyoming, while Trump popped up in a coupla places in Virginia.

Kinda weird, but this is politics, man.  And this time around, it ain't nuthin' like nuthin' that's gone before - even more than usual.

And so, more than ever - don't get happy, Democrats - get busy.  

Some people believe hard that Trump is in the process of using his "campaign" to build a new media empire that he intends to aim at taking over for DumFux News - that's number one.  And number two is that there's not likely gonna be anything close to resembling any kind of movement on a Progressive Agenda unless lotsa Democrats go to DC along with Hillary Clinton.

Yeah yeah, I've said all that before. Tired of it?  Tough shit - I'll be saying it plenty more from here on in. Get used to it.

And this too:

Ms Conway

In her own words:

And lots more at Media Matters

As far as she's concerned, it's nothing but a can of beans on the shelf, or a bag of chips in the machine in the break room - waiting for somebody to wander by with a coupla bucks to spend.

Kellyanne Conway says what she says because she gets paid to say it.  She'll say whatever it is you want her to say if you pay her enough.  There's a word for that, but I won't use that word for Ms Conway because I have too much respect for honest, hard-working whores.

No soul and no honor.

America's Sheriff

Contradictions exist, but they cannot prevail.

via HuffPo:

PHOENIX, Aug 19 (Reuters) - A federal judge recommended on Friday that prosecutors bring criminal contempt charges against Arizona lawman Joe Arpaio, finding that the controversial sheriff had violated court orders stemming from a 2007 racial profiling case.

--and--

“When a federal court finds that a law enforcement official has lied under oath and willfully flouted court orders, that official must be held to account,” said Cecillia Wang, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants’ Rights Project.

So here's the thing: When you're trying to preserve and protect what you believe to be "American" by employing strategies and tactics that are decidedly Un-American, then you've got a monster contradiction on your hands that has to be resolved.

And like I've said a time or two before -

I hear "Arpaio", I think "Sheriff"

And when I hear "Maricopa", I think "Nottingham"