In a bit of a headscratcher, Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara told the court he won't be asking for the 'Stand Your Ground' hearing tentatively scheduled for April.
The Christian Science Monitor offered some ideas:
Some legal experts following the case, however, were not surprised at the defense's decision to forego a "stand your ground" hearing, given normal legal maneuvering in a high-profile murder case.
One argument goes that Zimmerman's ultimate claim may not be "stand your ground" at all, since he technically was on the ground and unable to retreat any further at the moment he shot Trayvon. In that scenario, he could claim self-defense under pre-"stand your ground" laws.
A more likely scenario, says University of Florida law professor Bob Dekle, is that Mr. O'Mara doesn't want to go through a bench mini-trial and possibly tip off the prosecution about its strategy should the "stand your ground" plea fail.
Hmm. Some discussion of the law is here and here. The burden of proof does shift between the pre-trial hearing and the trial. At the hearing, the pre-ponderance of evidence must support a self-defense claim; at trial ,the prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that self-defense was not in play. So conceivably, the same set of facts could lose in a hearing but lead to acquital at trial.
And if the defense is worried that the political pressure on the judge will weigh against dismissal, the pre-trial hearing might result only with the defense tipping its hand in order to generate headlines such as "Judge Rejects Zimmerman Self-Defense Claim". That sort of pre-trial publicity might not be helpful (I am not a high-priced jury consultant, but that is my guess).
TROUBLE IN PARADISE: Witness 8, aka "Dee Dee", seems to have a bit of a credibility problem:
Zimmerman's defense appeared to question the credibility of a teenage girl, identified only as Witness 8, who claims she was on the phone with Martin just moments before he was shot. Witness 8 is arguably the key witness in the upcoming trial.
Witness 8 told authorities that Martin told her that he was scared of a strange man following him. She also claimed that that after hearing the shooting over Martin's phone, she was hospitalized for trauma, a claim that prosecutors later admitted was false.
The defense wanted Judge Debra Nelson to question prosecutors about how they learned that this claim was not true, but Nelson refused. Defense attorney Donald West also asked the court for more information about the account she gave attorneys.
Jeralyn Merritt has an exhaustive post on Witness 8. Her post-shooting trauma and hospitalization was not inconsequential - it fact, it was the explanation for her failure to contact police or investigators for weeks after the shooting. Here is Matt Lauer of ABC interviewing Trayvon Martin's mother and family attorney Ben Crump:
LAUER: This is not a recorded phone call, Mrs. Fulton. The young lady--the police in Sanford asked anyone with information to come forward if they had that. This young lady, according to our reporting, had not come forward. And we're now getting her version of this phone call. Can it be trusted?
Ms. FULTON: Yes, it can. She was distraught because of the situation that happened with Trayvon and that--the fact that she was on the phone with him when he--when the incident occurred--right before the incident occurred. So she was very distraught. She had to go to the hospital. She was hospitalized. She also mentioned to us that she had feelings for Trayvon, so it hurt her dearly to know that he has passed away.
I guess some new explanation will be offered.
TM,
Good to see you back in the groove.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 06, 2013 at 04:16 PM
The second paragraph of the CSM article TM quotes indicates that the author may be confused about the pretrial hearing. The pretrial hearing need not be limited to cases in which ground standing is at issue. Even though Zimmerman was on the ground and had nowhere to retreat to, his lawyer could still win a pretrial hearing on the ground that Zimmerman was in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm, so that lethal force was permissible. The reason it's called a stand your ground hearing, I beleive, is that it was enacted into law at the same time as the stand your ground provision.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 06, 2013 at 04:25 PM
O'Mara may feel that he needs all the time available to prepare for trial without preparing for the pretrial hearing.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 06, 2013 at 04:27 PM
Whitey Zimmerman should have shot Skittles with a DRONE. That's ok.
Posted by: GUS | March 06, 2013 at 04:32 PM
When this sorts out and Zim goes free, will there be repercussions to the police, DA, the fake girlfriend (Sorry Te'o) and counsel for Obama's fake son?
They have ruined his life.
Posted by: MarkO | March 06, 2013 at 04:49 PM
"I am not a high-priced jury consultant."
There is no other kind.
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | March 06, 2013 at 05:04 PM
TM, you do a better job at explaining criminal cases than any of the reporters I've read. Right on the nail.
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 05:07 PM
Drop a Hellfire on his head.
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 06, 2013 at 05:08 PM
I see you're feeling your oats again, TK. Good.
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 05:09 PM
TC,
O'Mara has the last photos of a really bloody Zimmerman plus at least an even chance TawanaDeeDee is uncoachably dumb. He may just be holding cards close for a bit longer. The Talk Left post mentions the fact the judge authorized a deposition of Crump by O'Mara. I don't know if it has happened yet and O'Mara may want to wait to see if the extent of Crump's subornation of perjury becomes a little more clear.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 06, 2013 at 05:10 PM
Rick, I have an inkling that DeeDeeDumDum looks a lot like Obama's, WOULD BE, son Skittles, if you know what I'm sayin'. Facts will not matter. The RAILROADING has begun.
ALL ABOARD!!!!!
Posted by: GUS | March 06, 2013 at 05:40 PM
I suppose that few if any will remember it and even fewer will care, but many months ago I predicted that GZ would NOT seek a SYG hearing (for the reasons that TM has now suggested were the reasons) and some here said that it would be "malpractice" for his lawyer not to demand such a hearing.
I think it was the right move.
Posted by: Theo | March 06, 2013 at 05:40 PM
Oh gracious, I hope we never have to hear about her feelings for "sweet, unappreciated, would have been a contender if his young life had not been brutally extinguished" Trayvon.
Katie Couric is ready to make America feel the loss. Because if she had feelings for him, he must be wonderful and not at fault in the least.
Posted by: rse | March 06, 2013 at 05:43 PM
The Trayvon nonsense? I saw a few minutes of that last week with some Sanford local TV guy on CNN-- it was vomitous. When GZ is acquitted, the 'poor Trayvon, no justice' media meme will be beyond vomitous.
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 05:56 PM
Congrats on projecting what O'M would do once he received all his discovery docs from the state and witness accounts.
The GZ case has descended well beyond farce IMO. It's more ridiculous than the Bondfire of the Vanities idiocy. Any news account I read where the prosecutor de la Rionda is quoted, he gets more and more absurd. But this sad joke will continue to a trial and verdict.
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 06:01 PM
St Jane dreamers--this Qatari emir has beaten us to the draw.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/04/qatar-emir-buys-six-greek-islands
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 06:13 PM
Good to see George has chunked up...more cushion for the pushin-and boy oh boy will there be alot of pushin.
Posted by: dublindave | March 06, 2013 at 06:14 PM
NK,
What does de la Rionda do if TawanaDeeDee claims to be so traumatized (by the thought of a perjury charge) she can't testify? Does he go with fleeting shadows and "expert" ear witnesses?
How does he keep the bloody Zimmerman photo out?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 06, 2013 at 06:15 PM
I guess some new explanation will be offered.
She could look into the "untidy" excuse. That often works for Dems..
Posted by: Janet | March 06, 2013 at 06:15 PM
Am I the only person that really wants Scott to get slattered in this for letting himself get rolled by the race hustlers? Going outside the system to placate the grievance mob never works out well and now a life has been unnecessarily ruined.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 06, 2013 at 06:16 PM
Theo, JM's post today seems to say that O'Mara hasn't ceded right to press for immunity, just that particular date for a hearing.
Defense can still ask for dismissal on immunity grounds at other times.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/3/6/5418/05480
Posted by: xbradtc | March 06, 2013 at 06:17 PM
The Blaze:
"BS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson on Tuesday night reported that the Obama administration has turned over documents relating to the Benghazi terrorist attack to the Senate Intelligence Committee. She made a number of revelations that don’t bode well for the White House via her official Twitter account.
“One source who viewed the docs says someone in federal agency ‘press shop’ was involved in changing the talking points to remove al Qaeda,” Attkisson wrote.
She also reported that an “official familiar with the docs” said there were advanced warnings in the days leading up to the attack, including ones that “specifically warned of an imminent attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.”
The CBS reporter also referenced another source familiar with the Benghazi documents that said nearly all communication between Libya and Washington, D.C., since the attack began referenced al-Qaeda as being the likely “instigators.” That portion is significant because there are still unanswered questions as to why the Obama administration initially blamed the attack on an anti-Muslim YouTube video."
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 06:17 PM
NK --
I think that you do not need witness statments or documents to see that calling for a SYG hearing was a gamble of dubious value. I think most judges would be wary of enduring the media firestorm (perhaps a la Rodney King) if they let GZ go. Moreover, it is not as though the alternative to denying his SYG motion is to send him to jail. The alternative is to let the jury decide, which lets the judge off the hook and is hardly a miscarrage of justice. It would take an incredibly strong judge to throw out the case on his/her own.
For me, that is the main reason not to seek a SYG hearing. A loss is likely and will be likely misreported in the media.
I certainly agree that the case is getting more and more ridiculous. It is the problem (like Duke Lacrosse) where the media wants to report a narrative rather than learn the facts. The biggest problem for the prosecutor that plausible media narrative does not equal truth beyond a reasonable doubt.
Posted by: Theo | March 06, 2013 at 06:20 PM
DuDa is masturbating to his prison rape fantasies again. What a loathesome creature.
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 06, 2013 at 06:24 PM
dumbassdave == Reggie Love
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 06, 2013 at 06:24 PM
It would take an honest judge and I'm not seeing any honest judges, pols or prosecutors in South Fla.
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 06:24 PM
I've not looked at the GZ court files online since last summer. The 2nd degree charge based on 'profiling', so I suppose the State absolutely needs witness #8 to testify about the phone call to get in Trayvon claiming he was 'stalked', no witness #8 no 2nd degree charge. Yet the state has called witness #8 a liar in open court. The whole thing's absurd. The whole charge is a sham and disgrace.
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 06:27 PM
Taranto quotes Hilaire Belloc joyfully re Chavez:
"Here richly, with ridiculous display,
The Politician's corpse was laid away.
While all of his acquaintance sneered and slanged,
I wept: for I had longed to see him hanged."
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | March 06, 2013 at 06:30 PM
So NK, have you done a 180 from the start of the case?
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 06, 2013 at 06:31 PM
Clarice-- Benghazi could get any of the network news outfits millions of viewers if they went all in on the story like they did with Bush WMD, outing Plame or 9/11 warnings. Make a fortune, they could. Such is the devotion of the media to TeamDem to leave all that fame and money on the table. Dems-Media is a tightly run gangster organization, for sure.
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 06:33 PM
Even the ruby-red Guardian comes to grips with the reality of Rule by Man of the People:
"After a decade of record oil revenues totalling around a trillion dollars, an unprecedented bounty, Venezuela is falling apart: roads crumbling, bridges falling, refineries exploding. A wheezing power grid produces regular blackouts. Public hospitals are dank, prisons filthy and barbaric. Murder and kidnapping rates have soared, imposing a de facto curfew in many cities. The currency was recently devalued for the fifth time in a decade. Many young professionals have emigrated.
"The economy is warping from subsidies and controls. You can fill a car's petrol tank for around 50 cents but battle for months to start a company. High-rolling parasites nicknamed 'boligarchs' exploit government links to siphon off billions.
"Harassed by expropriations, private agriculture and industry have shrivelled. Huge imports fill the gap, the containers stacked into pyramids at ports, though you would never guess it from Orwellian rhetoric trumpeting 'food sovereignty' and 'manufacturing independence.'"
The People could sure use some of those siphned-off billions now. Fat chance.
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | March 06, 2013 at 06:38 PM
CaptH-- mais no. I kept an open mind until the State completed its investigation and saw the State's formal charge. I started calling this.. this.. 'thing' a sham the minute I saw the 'profiling' basis for the depraved heart 2nd degree charge. The discovery nonsense since then has made the sham all the more worse IMO. That said-- my opinion is that GZ was an idiot for getting out of his truck before the cops got there. Many here disagree, but a dead kid and ruined Zimmerman family to me add up to GZ making a terrible mistake in judgment. Just my opinion-- no point in rehashing all that- as RobC has pointed out, there is no chance my stubborness will yield on a matter like that.
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 06:40 PM
nearly all communication between Libya and Washington, D.C., since the attack began referenced al-Qaeda as being the likely “instigators.”
Membership in "al-Qaeda" is an obviously unprovable catch-all accusation. No one can ever prove that they don't belong or haven't belonged to this nefarious club, and no one can ever prove that someone did.
As Rand Paul said, there are no membership cards.
It was a convenient excuse during Bush's time, and it continues to be so.
Posted by: Extraneus | March 06, 2013 at 06:43 PM
Levin on the money with his current rant today:
"Look who is standing up for the Constitution today,
Rand Paul,
Ted Cruz,
Lee from Utah,
Rubio "
all guys supported by the Tea Party and particularly targeted by the Republican Establishment of the Rove types.
The future of the party is the guys on the floor out there challenging the Attorney General on the Senate floor.
Levin did it with much more verbiage and passion but I think he hit this one out of the ballpark today.
Posted by: daddy | March 06, 2013 at 06:49 PM
no = non, mais bien sur!
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 06:50 PM
Well it's a tricky issue, because they operate by using their branch offices, AQIM, is certainly an AQ affiliate, although I don't think the lead one, in this operation, the parallel, is to 'Clear and Present Danger' where
the kingpin, is communicating with his ex Cuban
intelligence officer lieutenant, the latter decides to go freelance to cut out the middle man,
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 06:53 PM
End of the day, the Record is going to show that the 'film protest' was a complete fabrication by the Team Dem/Media. And that cow Hildabeast and that lying SOS JEF continued the lie in front of flag draped coffins at Andrews AFB. Scum. And the media got onboard and continued the hoax-- they all had an election to win. F%#@kers
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 07:05 PM
--Taranto quotes Hilaire Belloc joyfully re Chavez:--
Belloc is a far too neglected genius. His Introduction to The Path to Rome is one of the most unexpectedly funny things ever written.
Another of his better known verses, a Christmas blessing;
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | March 06, 2013 at 07:08 PM
Daddy,
I'm so proud that the guys the tea party sent to office meant what they campaigned on. That is as rare as an egret in Sturbridge.
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | March 06, 2013 at 07:09 PM
Jane,
Just caught my first 10 minutes of watching Rand Paul Live doing his filibuster. I think he is fabulous. If he has been as good all day as he has these last few minutes I am ecstatic. More egret's please! Just came up with a great point about the Dem's not wanting to even allow a vote on the statement that "it is unconstitutional to kill US citizens in the US via drones if they are not eminent threats."
Have to go off with the dogs now, but boy I cannot state enough how proud I am of this guy.
Posted by: daddy | March 06, 2013 at 07:15 PM
Sadly, Hillary's "What difference does it make at this point?" was dead on. They won the election and have moved on; "Benghazi" now has the same resonance as "birth certificate" in the public mind. After the 2014 elction is over there will be a Frontline documentary that will lay it all out. Nobody will watch it.
Posted by: boatbuilder | March 06, 2013 at 07:15 PM
OT-- todays Fed Beige Book cites Obamacare as reason cited by employers to restrain hiring or outright layoff. You effin' think. Obamacare was an obvious job killer from the moment it was mentioned. And here we are.
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 07:16 PM
I was really afraid Ted Cruz would lose so I went back and forth on supporting him and then Dewhurst, who had the name recognition and was a sure R in the senate. In the end I went with my heart and voted for Cruz. And boy, I'm glad I did. Dewhurst wouldn't be aggressive. I like this in Cruz.
Posted by: Sue | March 06, 2013 at 07:16 PM
From what I saw of Senators Paul and Cruz today, I was heartened that there are still people who take public service seriously. I couldn't help compare their calm and focused seriousness of purpose with Obama's petulant whining.
I also thought Senator Toomey of Pennsylvania did a good job in his back and forth with Senator Paul.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 06, 2013 at 07:18 PM
Boatbuilder-- I refuse to believe that real americans will act that way when the Benghazi story does come out in alternate media. If you're right that Benghazi is forever buried... I may have to give up my optimism union card.
Posted by: NK | March 06, 2013 at 07:19 PM
I always wondered if I could hitch a tanker up to a dock and have the nearest 20-30 Venezuelan gas stations fill 'er up. only a few hundred thousand gallons of unleaded would do nicely.
Of course if you Los Connexiones, you can already do that in Chavistaland.
Posted by: matt | March 06, 2013 at 07:22 PM
Well regardless of the political impact, as with the inevitability of the mathematics of finance,
AQ understands it won a match, and we will be hearing from soon,recall the 1st WTC attack, while Afghanistan was not totally under the Taliban's control,
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 07:24 PM
I'm happy to see the my Senator Ron Johnson got invited to dinner with THE SCORPION. Obama must have had a change of heart, and is really a neat guy who is willing to meet halfway!!!
Ron Johnson knows who Obama is.
Posted by: GUS | March 06, 2013 at 07:24 PM
NK--you do know that Hillary is hugely popular with the public and that John Kerry is our Secretary of State? Not to mention that, Benghazi or not, Obama was re-elected against a candidate who, for all his flaws, was not a convicted pedophile? I do not share your optimism. Something big may happen to turn the tide; it won't be Benghazi.
Posted by: boatbuilder | March 06, 2013 at 07:25 PM
"I'm happy to see the my Senator Ron Johnson got invited to dinner with THE SCORPION."
I trust he has the good sense to refuse to eat with that nasty little man. He should be on the floor of the Senate with Rand.
Posted by: MarkO | March 06, 2013 at 07:27 PM
Ted Cruz is now reading tweets about Rand Paul to Rand Paul on the Senate floor. It's great!
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | March 06, 2013 at 07:28 PM
Jane, I agree that it's great. But, where are all the other repub senators??? At dinner with O?
Posted by: sailor | March 06, 2013 at 07:41 PM
Here's a link to Taranto's Best of the Web today with a shout out to hit.
Posted by: Janet | March 06, 2013 at 07:43 PM
Wow, Janet, Jimmy does love them dictators a whole bunch, a former US President, who was his successor, not so much.
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 07:55 PM
Bravo, hit!!
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 07:57 PM
I'm beginning to think Carter is a demon--he seems to only like monsters and works--under the guise of a pious Christian --to beset free men and women in the worst ways.
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 07:59 PM
Yes, we thought him merely a fool, but he's more of a knave, at the least.
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 08:02 PM
You are *not* alone, Clarice @ 7:59.
Posted by: Frau Göttliche Komödie | March 06, 2013 at 08:06 PM
Btw, congrats hit, Lizza used to be sharper then this, he's going back to the foolishness he exhibited around the time of the Elian case,
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 08:07 PM
The republicans eating dinner with the president should walk out, come back and #standwithrand - except Lindsay Graham who agrees with the president, despite the fact that the president refuses to admit where he stands.
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | March 06, 2013 at 08:16 PM
WOW Hit. Now I know someone who was quoted in the Wall Street Journal. I'm humbled.
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | March 06, 2013 at 08:18 PM
He's a caca-demon.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | March 06, 2013 at 08:27 PM
See the overlapping venn diagrams here,
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2013/03/pakistani_al_qaeda_c.php
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 08:29 PM
2 Corinthians 11:14
And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of light.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | March 06, 2013 at 08:36 PM
Posted by: Bruce | March 06, 2013 at 08:38 PM
The contrast of the Republican Senators having an expensive dinner with Obama and the Senators who have shown up to support and relieve Rand Paul, couldn't be more striking.
A little Godfather movie-ish contrast.
Posted by: centralcal | March 06, 2013 at 08:42 PM
The economy is warping from subsidies and controls
The Guardian laments what happens to a nation when the amount of economic activity controlled by the state increases to "nearly all", from the Guardian's preferred level of "most".
Posted by: bgates | March 06, 2013 at 08:44 PM
For many years I maintained that one cannot name an anti-American dictator of whom Mr. Carter does not approve. Nothing has changed my mind.
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | March 06, 2013 at 08:53 PM
I expect to see his lawyers asking for the self-defense verdict both after the prosecution rests, and when they rest. And, if the judge is as cautious as you suggest, the judge would take them under advisement, and only maybe rule in his favor if the jury convicts. That way he most likely has the cover of a jury acquittal.
Posted by: Bruce | March 06, 2013 at 08:54 PM
From Taranto's piece;
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of Barry.
All narcissists have an overwhelming sense of entitlement and absolute disdain for others' abilities and interests.
Barry may incidentally and unintentionally be acknowledging what Taranto says he is, but he is first and foremost quite literally wistfully dreaming of having dictatorial powers.
They all believe they are entitled to be little Stalins and attempt to be in whatever little corner of the world they extend their sphere of influence. Some get farther extending that sphere than others but they all at heart wish that every man pay them tribute.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | March 06, 2013 at 08:56 PM
I met him when I was in law school and he was telling a story that was stunningly stupid. Put him in a poor light in terms of judgment. And he just beamed telling it like a sanctimonious fool.
That former Presidents picture tells it all. Everyone else is interacting and no one much wants anything to do with him.
Posted by: rse | March 06, 2013 at 08:57 PM
Jeralyn seems to have made an error, upi reports the judge denied the defense motion to depose Crump and here's the order.
The defense has received the Court's ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION REGARDING DEPOSITION OF BENJAMIN CRUMP, ESQUIRE.
http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/court-documents/106-order-denying-defendant-s-motion-regarding-deposition-of-benjamin-crump-esquire
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 08:57 PM
That may well be so, Bruce, but for all the reasons TM states, O'Mara was smart to pass.This isn't an honest court, this isn't an honest prosecutor.. No reason to tip his hand before trial on a lost cause.
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 09:00 PM
Was that in this post, in the LUN, Clarice, because we already knew this, the fix is in,
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 09:06 PM
Jeralyn seems to have made an error
I was wondering about that, because I remembered reading about that a couple of weeks ago. As I recall, the judge said that it just wasn't germane to the case. That may be, but this whole thing is such a sham.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 06, 2013 at 09:11 PM
the link TM gave indicates that the Judge was allowing Crump's deposition by O'M, but, in fact, on Friday the Court denied that.
Jeralyn in Narciso's link and TM's cites testimony strongly suggesting Dee Dee was coached by Crump and lying. Jeralyn thinks the prosecution will not call her as a witness..
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 09:17 PM
That was the most recent link, to show you how wedded they are to a faulty template on other matters;
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/3/6/5418/05480
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 09:22 PM
And, how are the Obama-mania media covering the filibuster on Twitter? I give you Mr. Jake Tapper:
Jake Tapper @jaketapper
Ayotte You, Babe #filibustersongs
--------
juvenile attempts
at humorto demean.Posted by: centralcal | March 06, 2013 at 09:24 PM
Sorry, I was referring to the one, where they like Lizza, miss the point about Obama.
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 09:24 PM
This, one in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 09:26 PM
For many years I maintained that one cannot name an anti-American dictator of whom Mr. Carter does not approve. Nothing has changed my mind.
At least the old goat has stopped the smarmy references to whatever nubile squeeze accompanies said dictator. Maybe Rosalyn told him how creepy he sounded...
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 06, 2013 at 09:34 PM
Will TawanaDeeDee have to provide for representation at her deposition? It would be a real hoot if O'Mara could extract evidence of subornation in deposition. If O'Mara called her for the defense all we would need is a few jugglers and a trained seal to make a complete circus.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 06, 2013 at 09:47 PM
More often, then not, John, he won't say something he has to retract later
http://twitchy.com/2013/03/06/filiblizzard-no-snow-but-glenn-beck-and-others-score-with-these-top-filibuster-tweets/
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 09:50 PM
Even some of my moonbat acquaintances on Facebook are saluting Rand Paul.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 06, 2013 at 09:51 PM
Yeah, Rick, but unfortunately circuses usually end up with the wrong outcome--see Simpson, O. J. Granted it's harder to unjustly convict someone than to have jury nullification, but a hung jury wouldn't be a surprise.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 06, 2013 at 09:54 PM
It's hard to call someone as an adverse witness, esp in Fla where the judges seem to be ignorant as dirt. (Normally when you call a witness you are vouching for their credibility so the prosecution can;t call her nor would the defense..but in federal law, at least, you can call someone as an adverse witness to get their testimony on record under circumstances where it is clear they are adverse to your client and you are not vouching for their testimony.)
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 09:56 PM
I'm not sure which story I read, but the denial of the Crump deposition seems to date back to February 22nd, as in this:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/key-deposition-sought-trayvon-martin-case-18563718
Posted by: jimmyk | March 06, 2013 at 09:58 PM
I emailed Jeralyn asking about the apparent inconsistency..Of course if I weren't lazy I could go to the utube recording of the hearing linked at her site.
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 10:06 PM
Ignatz, the narcissist does not see himself as others do. He is omniscient and is not subject to challenge. And generally the narcissist has no ability to hang with those who might stand up to him.
Posted by: GUS | March 06, 2013 at 10:06 PM
Niters..
Posted by: Clarice | March 06, 2013 at 10:19 PM
Ignatz, a perfect example of Obama is what happened after Paul Ryan tore him a new ass hole at the White House.
Same exact thing when the SCOTUS affirmed CITIZENS UNITED.
See a pattern???
Posted by: GUS | March 06, 2013 at 10:22 PM
Wonder how Ron Wyden will be made to pay for joining in the filibuster?
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | March 06, 2013 at 10:27 PM
He will be heralded as bi-partisan??
Posted by: GUS | March 06, 2013 at 10:30 PM
If Rand Paul and Ted Cruz keep this up much longer I'm going to have to take back my usual sarcastic comment about the Senate being "the World's Greatest Deliberative Body" and mean it in earnest ...that is of course until Harry Reid and the usual morons retake the floor.
Posted by: daddy | March 06, 2013 at 10:32 PM
Now comes this, from Breitbart:
"On Wednesday afternoon, Christopher Anders, Senior Legislative Council at the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington D.C., spoke with Breitbart News exclusively about Senator Rand Paul’s filibuster of the John Brennan nomination to CIA director over the administration’s failures to answer questions about domestic use of drones. Anders backed Paul to the hilt, and was highly critical of the Obama administration. 'It’s certainly a courageous and historic effort by Senator Rand Paul and his colleagues, who are now increasing in numbers and coming to the fore in support of his filibuster,' said Anders."
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | March 06, 2013 at 10:34 PM
DoT,
Wyden is not up until '16. It was a low risk move. If this turns out to be The Howard Beale Moment, he's going to look like a genius. I cannot remember a time when the level of cognitive dissonance was any higher than it is today.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 06, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Ted Cruz reading Shakespeare and doing it well. I just love him!
Posted by: Jane on Ipad | March 06, 2013 at 10:38 PM
I do wonder how many lefties are fuming that THIS IS NOT HOW FILIBUSTERS ARE DONE!!!!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | March 06, 2013 at 10:40 PM
One recalls, the stunned gangster, guarding the secret stash house in the UnTouchables, when Malone deigns to bust in with Ness.
Posted by: narciso | March 06, 2013 at 10:47 PM
Are you guys listening to Cruz? I am blown away.
Posted by: Jane on Ipad | March 06, 2013 at 10:48 PM