July 1, 2013

Interview: Trayvon's stepmother is asked whether race was a factor in her step-son's killing

Anderson Cooper interviewed Alicia Stanley on Friday. He asked her this question, among others:

COOPER: Do you believe race was a factor in why Zimmerman zeroed in on Trayvon?

STANLEY: I would be lying if I said yes, so I'm going to say this, no, I really don't think it was Zimmerman don't like black people, or he picked him out because he was black. Did he profile him with the hoodie and stuff like that as this thug or whatever walking or whatever was in Zimmerman's mind, yes. But to say that he targeted him because he was black, no, I don't think so.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/28/acd.01.html

Let's discuss, DU'ers.

July 1, 2013

Jonathan Chait (2000): John McCain "is not a Republican"

Enjoy this jewel by a Greenwald hater.
Title: " This Man Is Not A Republican"

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/man-not-republican

June 30, 2013

Greenwald Derangement Syndrome

This is a response to a recent article written by Obama defender Johnathan Chait, entitled, "Greenwald is Ralph Nader."
From the blog The Heart of The Matter, written by Barry Eisler:

I just read an article by Jonathan Chait in New York Magazine that was so silly and self-indulgent I wasn't going to comment on it. What's the point of comparing Greenwald to Ralph Nader (or to anyone else, really)? What's the point of discussing Greenwald at all, compared to the importance of his reporting? Can you really try to castigate Greenwald for arguing that in various ways Obama is worse than Bush, when so many Constitutional law experts are arguing that indeed, Obama is worse than Nixon? Is Chait ignorant of the mountain of evidence behind this argument, or of the other people making it? Why does he refer to but fail to address the actual evidence in the supporting piece he links to, instead treating the argument itself as ipso facto evidence of sanctimony?

snip

And most glaring of all, did Chait really complain that "For Greenwald... the evils of liberals loom far larger than the evils of conservatives," when he's talking about a guy who's written no fewer than three books (and God knows how many blog posts) on the failings of conservatives -- with titles like How Would a Patriot Act? Defending American Values from a President [Bush] Run Amok; and A Tragic Legacy: How a Good vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency; and Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics?

Read more here, including how Johnathan Chait's feelings are hurt in part because Greenwald once called him a "McCain worshipper": http://barryeisler.blogspot.com/2013/06/greenwald-derangement-syndrome.html

June 30, 2013

Proof Glenn Greenwald hates Obama

He's written 3 books against the policies of his administraiton, ALL trashing him:

"How Would a Patriot Act? Defending American Values from a President Run Amok by Glenn Greenwald (May 15, 2006)"
"A Tragic Legacy: How a Good vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency by Glenn Greenwald (Apr 8, 2008)"
"Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics by Glenn Greenwald (Oct 7, 2008)"

Obsessed much, Glen? Why didn't you attack George W. Bush when he was President?

June 29, 2013

European Parlament President: If it's true US spied on us, it's a "huge scandal"

This was the reaction reported by Der Spiegel Magazine, which you can see in english here via Google Translate:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fdeutschland%2Freaktionen-auf-abhoerprogramm-der-nsa-gegen-eu-vertretungen-a-908570.html

Warning: The translation seems awkward and funny as usual when one language is translated by a machine to the other.

June 29, 2013

GZ case. The gap between legal experts and internet non-experts continues

When you're on certain internet forums discussing the George Zimmerman case, you get the impression that everything is rosey for the prosecution: Rachel Jeantel is cute instead of a mumbling liar, barely anyone speaks about bad news for the prosecution, etc.

Now let's see what legal analysts in the Orlando area are saying about the latest developments in the case, according to the Orlando Sentinel in its article yesterday which begins like this:'

SENTINEL: The George Zimmerman trial Friday prompted TV's legal analysts to think back to the Casey Anthony case. The comparison was highly unfavorable to the prosecution.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/blogs/tv-guy/os-george-zimmerman-casey-anthony-connection-20130628,0,4085554.post?track=rss

Channel 2 analyst Jeff Dean: "he problem was the state didn't have any evidence, and it was starting to show."
***

WKMG-Channel 6 legal analyst Luis Calderon: "the state's witnesses were almost testifying for Zimmerman."

***

Vanessa Braeley, a legal analyst for Central Florida News 13 "Good a good witness for the defense because he was clear and steadfast with his answers." (Good is the last name of one of the witnesses).

***

WKMG's Eric Dubois: Gave Good a B for helping the defense and an F for helping the prosecution.

***

WOFL's Ferwerda summed up: "It's been a great day for the defense on the state's case. It's unusual. It's bizarre."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/blogs/tv-guy/os-george-zimmerman-casey-anthony-connection-20130628,0,4085554.post?track=rss

So go and read what the people who know about this stuff are saying about this case, if you wish.

June 28, 2013

First responding cop testifies: GZ's nose was "bloody". "Lacerations" and "contusions" on his head

His name is Tim Smith.

Smith testified he handcuffed Zimmerman at gunpoint and confiscated Zimmerman's gun. Other officers arrived and began CPR on Trayvon, he said.

Smith said he saw that Zimmerman’s clothes were wet, his nose was bloody and there were lacerations and contusions to his head.

A firefighter/EMT who attended Zimmerman (Stacy Livingstone) said what she saw:

"Livingston also treated Zimmerman, who she said had a "very swollen, bleeding nose" and two cuts to the back of his head. He declined to be taken to a hospital, she said."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-day-15-20130628,0,7092519.story

This is devastating for the prosecution, unless they plan to use the Zimmerman-hurt-himself theory endorsed by some on the internet, which is weird, to say the least.

June 28, 2013

Analyst casts doubt on witness assertion that she heard "the sound of wet grass"

I thought I was the only one wondering how in the world Rachel Jean heard a headpiece fall on "wet grass" during a phone call. Bob Somerby (progressive media critic) points out that the claim has been typed over and over without curiousity as to how this may happen.


" None of the cable analysts, not one, seemed willing to speak to this matter. As a standard fallback position, they praised her for being “authentic.” Somerby said. http://dailyhowler.blogspot.com/2013/06/diogenes-seeks-cable-analyst.html

I know most people here will find a way to make it perfectly sensible for the sound of a headpiece on wet grass being heard by someone on the other side of phone, and many will claim to have thought of the acoustic differences between dry vs. wet grass.

But I'll ask anyway. What's your opinion?

Additionally, the fact that this assertion came from the worst witness in the trial so far makes discussing her claims fair game.

June 28, 2013

witness says trayvon was on top, another one says he was at the bottom

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-witness-put-top-trayvon-martin-fatal/story?id=19517236#.Uc29-n0pBcs

Since there has to be no "reasonable doubt" for a conviction, this contradiction is bad for the prosecution. It would be good if both agreed that Trayvon was at the bottom in the fight.

June 28, 2013

2 law professors: Obama "has seemingly forgotten the constitutional law he once taught."

In a NYT op-ed they co-wrote, talking about the NSA surveillance programs.

Excerpt:

The two programs violate both the letter and the spirit of federal law. No statute explicitly authorizes mass surveillance. Through a series of legal contortions, the Obama administration has argued that Congress, since 9/11, intended to implicitly authorize mass surveillance. But this strategy mostly consists of wordplay, fear-mongering and a highly selective reading of the law. Americans deserve better from the White House — and from President Obama, who has seemingly forgotten the constitutional law he once taught.

Link
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/opinion/the-criminal-nsa.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&