The Justice Departmnt and FBI have picked up the Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman case. Zimmerman can't be cleared before the election, so unless they can come up with convincing new evidence (audio wizardry on the 911 tapes?) this case goes into pre-election limbo.
I still think Zimmerman ought to be guilty of something, but under Florida's "Stand Your Ground" self defense law (aka "Shoot First"), the other party to their scuffle is dead and no other witnesses seem to contradict the self-defense alibi.
We get a new version of Zimmerman's story:
Zimmerman said he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on when Trayvon attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck, police said. He said he feared for his life and fired the semiautomatic handgun he was licensed to carry because he feared for his life.
The self-appointed self-important neighborhood watch captain wasn't sure what street he was on? Or was he just double-checking?
The police captain had offered this (possibly hypothetical) version of events last week:
“Mr. Zimmerman’s claim is that the confrontation was initiated by Trayvon,” Police Chief Bill Lee said in an interview. “I am not going into specifics of what led to the violent physical encounter witnessed by residents. All the physical evidence and testimony we have independent of what Mr. Zimmerman provides corroborates this claim to self-defense.”
To claim self-defense, someone has to show there was danger of great bodily harm or death, Lee said. “Zimmerman had injuries consistent with his story,” Lee said.
Zimmerman had a damp shirt, grass stains, a bloody nose and was bleeding from a wound in back of his head, according to police reports.
“If someone asks you, ‘Hey do you live here?’ is it OK for you to jump on them and beat the crap out of somebody?” Lee said. “It’s not.”
Since we have the "not going into specifics" disclaimer it is not clear that the bit about "If someone asks you..." is Zimmerman's actual alibi.
Or, I suppose, Zimmerman could have asked that question, turned around, and gotten jumped.
The Feds will sort this out. Either they clear Zimmerman next December or they indict him in October; there is no way they bring this to trial and risk an acquital or dismissal before the election.
People forget how GHWB went after him
Not everybody...
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 20, 2012 at 11:38 PM
Re: folding on Keystone... Howie Carr was saying on his show today that if the poll numbers keep looking like they have been, he wouldn't want to be working in an Iranian aspirin factory this Fall.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | March 20, 2012 at 11:42 PM
CH: That is because I follow him and LISTEN to him.
Posted by: Sara | March 20, 2012 at 11:45 PM
Well since no one else is willing, I will say it:
CONGRATULATIONS MITT!!!
Posted by: Sara | March 21, 2012 at 12:25 AM
I'm glad one of our candidates is getting big numbers, Sara, and I think (A)Barbara joins you, too.
Posted by: Frau Steingehirn | March 21, 2012 at 12:36 AM
Ditto from this Barbara.
Posted by: Barbara | March 21, 2012 at 12:40 AM
Who is the US Ambassador to the Quai D'Orsay, not that it matters;
http://www.timesofisrael.com/france-clears-three-neo-nazi-suspects-in-jewish-school-shooting/
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 12:40 AM
Blair was Bush's poodle but Obama and Cameron are forging important alliances.
Lord, how I loathe hypocrisy.
Posted by: Chubby | March 21, 2012 at 06:17 AM
I was wondering if anyone has tackled the 3 vs 10 dilemma. How is it we were told it takes 10 years to ramp up production of oil, but the prez claims he increased it in only 3 years?
Seems like a problem. Either drill baby drill yields results much faster than we were told or Obama inherited increasing production from Bush.
http://floppingaces.net/2012/02/29/democrats-try-to-convince-us-that-drilling-for-more-oil-is-the-answer-to-high-gas-prices-except-when-its-not-reader-post/
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 21, 2012 at 07:04 AM
"David Cameron has revealed that Barack Obama ‘tucked him up in bed’ aboard Air Force One during his recent trip to America.
The Prime Minister said the U.S. President let him sleep in his day bed on the lavishly appointed aircraft as the pair flew back to Washington after watching a basketball match together last week.
The revelations came as Mr Cameron admitted he was overawed by the red carpet treatment laid on by the White House during his visit to Washington with wife Samantha"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2117730/David-Cameron-tucked-Presidents-bed-Obama-Air-Force-One.html
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 21, 2012 at 07:08 AM
I think Bo gets along with cameron because they have similar aspirations on the green economy. I wonder if david knows the green economy is not really about green technology.
I think the current pres likes the game where words have a meaning one user knows about and the other does not.
Posted by: rse | March 21, 2012 at 07:16 AM
rse, looks like the Obama regime and Soros have education covered according to this report.
http://tinyurl.com/73trm3f
"Obama’s Department of Education Partners With George Soros’ Open Society Institute…"
Posted by: pagar | March 21, 2012 at 07:28 AM
Blair was Bush's poodle
Cameron is Obama's barbie.
Posted by: Jane | March 21, 2012 at 07:35 AM
Fifteen minute you tube to get your day going.
http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/03/19/georgia-gets-f-on-anti-corruption-measures-ga-courts-prove-corrupt-in-obama-ballot-challenges-state-integrity-investigation-ethics-open-records-and-disclosure-laws/#comment-231196
Bill Clinton said what?!?
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 21, 2012 at 07:41 AM
hah, Jane.
I awoke to the news that maybe the French have found and are in a standoff with the Islamist murderer. I hope that is true and that they get him, but, alas I imagine there are others like him.
Posted by: centralcal | March 21, 2012 at 07:41 AM
jimmyk, You may be right about Opus Dei and that I spoke too quickly.
Posted by: Clarice | March 21, 2012 at 07:46 AM
" A medical examiner’s report categorized the death of a man who ignited his car in flames after a high-speed chase as a homicide.
The San Diego Medical Examiner identified the suspect as 24-year-old Southlake, Texas resident Alexander Arthur Martin.
On Wednesday, Martin was traveling the wrong way on Old Highway 80 near Campo when Highway Patrol agents attempted to pull him over. As officer approached his car, the car exploded in flames,killing Martin and injuring a Border Patrol agent.
The Medical Examiner listed Martin’s cause of death as “pending,” and said that either additional testing is still underway or that the investigation is still ongoing.
The report stated that Martin died at 12:12 a.m. Thursday.
A US Border Patrol authority said on Thursday that often drug smugglers drive the opposite way on the highway to avoid the border checkpoint.
In early reports, the Sheriff’s Department said Martin reached into his glove box for a device before the car exploded. After Border Patrol took over the investigation, that detail was omitted.
The U.S. Border Patrol is handling the investigation and could not comment further since the investigation is ongoing."
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 21, 2012 at 07:51 AM
Thanks pagar.
Have I ever told the story about how osi funded the post berlin wall conversion of the eastern european universities so they replaced the old required Marxist-Leninist thought courses with sociology?
He also funded the development of reading instruction in quite a few of those eastern euro languages. Sight/whole language/Look Say, of course.
Posted by: rse | March 21, 2012 at 07:51 AM
The Fluking of America
Posted by: Jane | March 21, 2012 at 08:01 AM
wouldn't that be suicide, TK?
Posted by: Clarice | March 21, 2012 at 08:05 AM
No, Cameron is a fool, the best Oxford and McKinsey could provide, he stood for nothing
during the election, 'unhelpful' during th election, and hence he couldn't even get a majority, one of those sheepish vegetables
as the Iron Lady pointed out, more like Geoffrey Hurd than Heseltine.
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 08:07 AM
How is it we were told it takes 10 years to ramp up production of oil, but the prez claims he increased it in only 3 years?
Too bad there isn't a group of professionals in a position to ask the President or his press secretary that sort of challenging question.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 21, 2012 at 08:11 AM
As Janet says, jimmy, that would be helpful, then again this is the institution that gave us David Axelrod and 'Eric Stoltz'
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 08:21 AM
Regarding Jane's 8:01 link: Is there a constitutional time limitation on states' ratification of an amendment? Apparently not, according to this pro-ERA site, though Congress would have to act to extend a previous deadline (which is reassuring, since it seems unlikely any Congress in the near future will do that).
Also, according to the article: Ratification is a one-way street. A state cannot rescind a previous ratification, but a state that previously had rejected an amendment can subsequently ratify it.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 21, 2012 at 08:25 AM
Start warming those F-16's Bibi;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/20/administration-grants-exemptions-on-iran-sanctions/
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 08:31 AM
MelR@9:55lastnight-- I think $35/Barrell is overdone on supply increases, unless you couple it with a 20% Dollar increase on basket of currencies. To crater oil prices BOTH supply increases and Dollar appreciation are needed.
Posted by: NK | March 21, 2012 at 08:34 AM
Romney-- I agree with this Taranto observation about Romney dealing with 'Bam: "He’s a nice guy, but . . .” is exquisitely condescending. It’s probably not true: Obama strikes us as a petulant narcissist. But calling someone a “nice guy” is rarely a genuine compliment, and it never is when conjoined by “but.” As any man who has ever been rejected by a woman knows, describing someone as “a nice guy, but . . .” is another way of saying he’s ineffectual. That is exactly the point Romney is making about Obama."
Posted by: NK | March 21, 2012 at 08:35 AM
narciso-
When was he at mckinsey? Seriously. I just love those business models where all the clients are either governments or fellow vampire squids. Then the business wants to have its recommended policies implemented as "what business needs".
Posted by: rse | March 21, 2012 at 08:39 AM
Cameron-- I love our Brit friends and want the best for them, so I had high hopes of Conservs beating that fool Brown. Alas Cameron is the type of Conservative Thatcher detested. He is as our Brit friends would say-- a ponce (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ponce)
Posted by: NK | March 21, 2012 at 08:57 AM
More a blanc mange, rest assured, that is our bright shining future.
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 08:59 AM
NK, while the Romney's superficial compliment about Obama might be loaded with barbs, I only hope Romney realizes that Obama in reality is not a nice guy, that Romney's understanding of him goes deep enough to see him asa deliberately pernicious as opposed to just a stumblebum. What do you think? do you think Romney sees that?
Posted by: Chubby | March 21, 2012 at 09:03 AM
No, he doesn't, he's still expecting the dog to bark;
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/just-making-bulbs-illegal-not-banning-them/437231
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 09:05 AM
Looks like I am not the only one with vampire squids and the vampire economy on the brain. LUN is an excellent overview of the corporatism we talked about over the weekend. Never uses the term if you are reading rain but corporatism is all about the political entrepreneur. These days that 1% is more political entrep than economic.
Jane-I went back for that cap. Tea partiers especially need to understand this thoroughly. This is BO's vision for us. One of those old books I read was written by the CSM reporter who was stationed in moscow from 1922 to 1934. He makes the point that the socialist vision will always come through fascism and not communism anywhere that has ever had widespread economic success. The memory of capitalism makes C unacceptable but the essence of fascism is not appreciated until it is too late.
This understanding needs to be a part of this fall's campaign along with ryan's plan if we are to start fixing what has happened.
Plus all eyes on rio in june.
Posted by: rse | March 21, 2012 at 09:09 AM
Hey Cap'n,
Sorry to miss the thread last night. SXSW has changed a lot over the years. It still really does showcase a ton of edgy stuff, new acts, international stuff, etc., especially all the unofficial shows (the festival surrounding the festival which is mostly free - it's a great deal). But for some reason the keynote speakers and special guests are almost always classic rock retreads. (Not that I don't love classic rock.) Brooooooce case in point.
I've known the program/music director for many years and he is a good guy. He probably has checked out a little bit having done it for so long. But he got Mr. Porch and myself into the Tom Waits show during SXSW 1999, for which I will be forever grateful.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2012 at 09:10 AM
Really this is the first time I'd heard of it, Porch, and mostly because of the 'homeless
hotspot' controversy, If you listen to the lyrics, which I do I'll get ticked, so I'll
just hear the chords.
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 09:14 AM
rse, will you be citing the CSM author in your book? I am interested in any and all things related to the CSM.
Posted by: Chubby | March 21, 2012 at 09:16 AM
Teen scores porn star as prom date on Twitter
Posted by: Extraneus | March 21, 2012 at 09:18 AM
We saw this in that movie with Elise Cuthbert,
this is who you are referring to, rse;
http://www.ukrweekly.com/old/archive/1983/128314.shtml
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 09:27 AM
Noemie Emery hits it out of the park once again:
"There is a chasm between the GOP of 2012, revved up by the wins of the 2009-2010 cycles, and its candidates of the 1994-2006 vintage, who don't understand and can't harness its energies.
You call can it the Retreads' Revenge."
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2012/03/curse-republican-retreads/389876
Posted by: Clarice | March 21, 2012 at 09:37 AM
Jane,@0935 PM
"but I came away thinking we are far too late to stop the gvt from stealing our property rights.
When they build it into 25 trillion dollar settlements, it's hard to see how anyone/corp/govt can be kept from stealing anything you have.
"Most plainly, the bankers can tell 2.5 million people:
“Hey, you didn’t make your payment this month, your check’s short and we’re putting it in the no man’s land of a “suspense account” triggering delinquency and fees, even though you really did pay in full and have the canceled check to prove it. And guess what? No one but you cares; law enforcement won’t even consider dinging us for it."
"She also points out that wrongful foreclosures at a 1% rate are acceptable. Procedures around real estate are deliberate because any error of this magnitude has devastating consequences. But this new provision means that 1%, or over 33,000 erroneous foreclosures since 2008 would be perfectly OK as far as the authorities are concerned."
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/03/yet-another-reason-to-hate-the-mortgage-settlement-the-release-is-botched.html
Posted by: pagar | March 21, 2012 at 09:38 AM
It's a scam, pagar, look who negotiated it, they wouldn't have it any other way.
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 09:42 AM
Let's see. I was in DC from 86 to 92 and the same Dem mantra of drilling won't get new oil for 10 years was de rigeur. That was over 20 years of the same prophecy and a wrong one at that. Back then even with a pro-oil Dem chair of Senate Energy Committee in Bennett Johnston you got that naysayer Waxman to neutralize all the right moves. It was then I realized that the Dems were sold out to the Greens who were actually the new Reds. Nothing has changed since.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | March 21, 2012 at 09:53 AM
Off?
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | March 21, 2012 at 09:58 AM
JiB, Tom McClintock is on the same page. If the GOP leaders don't screw this up, he has created a situation where the green policy makers have to show their true colors in floor debate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_iEtH_WqHU
Oh how I hope and pray for this to happen.
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 21, 2012 at 10:17 AM
I feel so emboldened.
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 21, 2012 at 10:18 AM
LOL, TK, maybe under Barton as Committee Chair, but with Camp, 'game over man'
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2012 at 10:20 AM
Boldiacto
Posted by: Clarice | March 21, 2012 at 10:24 AM
feel so emboldened.
Very good TK.
Posted by: Jane | March 21, 2012 at 10:55 AM
But he got Mr. Porch and myself into the Tom Waits show during SXSW 1999, for which I will be forever grateful.
Waits is one of those performers whom I admire from a distance. He writes great songs and employs outstanding musicians who could use a high profile/income gig (Marc Ribot FTW) and I appreciate some of his screaming and outre uses of his voice; but his musical persona just doesn't click with me like it does you and Mr P and lots of my musical buds with very good taste. Oh well, it's not like I don't have other stuff to listen to.
Btw I lost my internet connection last night when a fat POS Roger Egbert film guide book fell off my bookshelf and broke my modem's power cord. Another thing to hold against that creep.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 21, 2012 at 11:12 AM
I only like Waits up through Franks Wild Years, Cap'n, and then I don't much care. And there are large swaths of his material even before that which I find boring. The persona isn't really a huge part of it for me; I just dig some of the music and it has great sentimental associations with a certain time in my life.
A very smart friend back in college once said that he thought Waits was a better arranger than a composer/songwriter. I got angry at him then but I eventually concluded that overall, that was probably true.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2012 at 11:28 AM
P.S. Sorry about Ebert. I have one of his film guides from 20 years ago and I keep wondering why it's still on my shelf. I guess even though he's a POS I do find some of his film writing to be half decent.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2012 at 11:30 AM
*Some* of his writing is the key point. He turned into a shrieking Nellie at all the violence in "Blue Velvet" against Isabella Rosselini as I was thinking that isn't a reaction consistent with somebody who wrote a Russ Meyer screen play for "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls". Siskel was the brains behind that outfit and their on screen interactions were pretty good.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 21, 2012 at 11:45 AM
Yeah, I liked Siskel much, much better. I didn't know he said that about Blue Velvet.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM
Ebert, that is.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM
I'm quoting from the 1997 film guide which killed my internet access: "Rossellini is asked to do things in this film that require real nerve. In one scene, she's publicly embarrassed by being dumped naked on the lawn of the police detective. In others, whe is asked to portray emotions that I would imagine most actresses would rather not touch. She is degraded, slapped around, humiliated, and undressed in front of the camera. And when you ask an actress to endure those experiences, you should keep your side of the bargain by putting her in an important film.....Lynch distances himself from her ordeal with his clever asides and witty little in-jokes. In a way, his behavior is more sadistic than the Hopper character."
Reading that today after being aware of that fat POS's attacks on Palin, I think even less of him than I did when I first read and heard them.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 21, 2012 at 12:03 PM
Well, this line of analysis has the advantage of being novel.
Before long we will have complaints of “hoodie profiling” to add to the usual dreck.
Posted by: Neo | March 23, 2012 at 11:19 AM